PrepTest 119, Section 2, Question 23
Whoever is kind is loved by somebody or(15 more words not shown)
The conclusion follows logically if(7 more words not shown)
- AWhoever loves someone(2 more words not shown)
- BWhoever loves everyone(2 more words not shown)
- CWhoever is happy(2 more words not shown)
- DWhoever loves no(6 more words not shown)
- EWhoever loves everyone(2 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Receiving love and giving love are different things.
Suppose Maya is kind. The first statement guarantees that somebody loves Maya. Call that person Alex. The second statement tells us that Alex is happy, because Alex loves someone. But the conclusion says Maya is happy. How did we get from Alex's happiness to Maya's?
We need Maya to love someone too. The argument hasn't told us that she does. Being on the receiving end of love doesn't, by itself, establish that she's giving any.
What we’re looking for
We're asked to make the conclusion follow. One possible fix would say that kind people love someone. Another would connect receiving love with giving love. Either connection would let us start with a kind person, establish that the person loves someone, and then use the rule about happiness. Keep the focus on the kind person whose happiness we're trying to prove.
Working the answers
- A
This expands the love given by someone who already loves a person: that person now loves everyone. Alex would qualify, but we still haven't established that Maya loves anyone. A rule about existing love doesn't give Maya the love she needs to qualify for happiness.
- B
Even if loving everyone establishes loving someone, we haven't been told that Maya loves everyone. This rule has no starting point for the kind person. It leaves the original gap between receiving love and giving it.
- C
We are trying to establish happiness. A rule that starts with someone already being happy doesn't get us there. If Maya were happy, C would tell us more about whom she loves, but her happiness is precisely what still needs proof.
- DCorrect
Test this against Maya's situation. We know somebody loves Maya. Could Maya love no one? D says that anyone who loves no one is loved by no one. So that possibility would clash with what we already know about Maya.
Maya must therefore love someone. And the original argument tells us that whoever loves anyone is happy. We can now finish the reasoning: Maya is kind, so she receives love; D prevents a person who receives love from loving no one; she therefore loves someone and is happy.
The wording takes a little work, but it supplies the missing connection without requiring Maya to love the particular person who loves her.
- E
This tells us that loving everyone is one way to establish kindness. We already know Maya is kind. It doesn't follow that she meets every possible description that would establish kindness. E never tells us that a kind person loves anyone, so it doesn't complete the argument.
More Sufficient Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Sufficient Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.