PrepTest 118, Section 4, Question 2
A factory spokesperson argued that the factory should(49 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(14 more words not shown)
- AA recent survey(40 more words not shown)
- BI object to(43 more words not shown)
- CThe students are(38 more words not shown)
- DThe most recent(33 more words not shown)
- EDespite all the(42 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The wastewater came from this factory. Why shouldn't the factory have to help clean it up?
The spokesperson doesn't deny the pollution. Instead, the response is that an independent contractor handled the disposal. In effect: someone else carried out the damaging activity, so don't hold us responsible for it.
I can see the distinction the spokesperson wants us to make. Perhaps the factory expected the contractor to dispose of the waste properly, and the contractor acted otherwise. That is a possible account, not something the passage establishes. We don't have to settle who really owes the cleanup. We need to understand the principle being used to shift responsibility.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for another argument that follows that principle. Look for a party refusing responsibility for the actions of someone who acts independently. Keep both pieces: the bad action is acknowledged, but responsibility is placed on the independent actor rather than the associated party.
Working the answers
- A
Parents are being advised to investigate teachers' qualifications because many teachers may lack training in their subjects. Nobody is denying responsibility for something an independent person did. The survey supplies a reason to check qualifications; it doesn't transfer blame.
- BCorrect
The parents correspond to the factory, and the older adolescents correspond to the independent contractor. The adolescents commit offenses, just as the contractor disposes of the wastewater improperly. The argument then rejects holding the associated party responsible: don't blame the parents for actions the adolescents freely choose for themselves.
The relationships aren't identical in every everyday respect. A child isn't a hired contractor. But the relevant principle matches: the other person's independence is offered as the reason to withhold responsibility from the connected party.
- C
This argues that a course requirement is unfair because it makes students read material not covered in class. It doesn't say that students should escape blame for something another person independently did. Objecting to a requirement is too broad a resemblance; we need the particular reason for rejecting responsibility.
- D
This gives a reason to exclude someone from a decision: a relative competing for the prize creates a possible conflict of interest. It doesn't excuse the appointee from responsibility for the relative's conduct. The conclusion concerns who should select a winner, not who should answer for a harmful act.
- E
This questions whether the politician visited the village at all. That's different from the factory's response. The spokesperson accepts that the pollution happened and disputes who is responsible. E uses villagers' reports to challenge whether the claimed event happened.
More Parallel Reasoning questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Reasoning questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.