PrepTest 126, Section 1, Question 16
Philosopher: An event is intentional if it is(36 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- ATarik left the(31 more words not shown)
- BEllis tore the(32 more words not shown)
- CJudith's hailing a(32 more words not shown)
- DYasuko continued to(33 more words not shown)
- EHenry lost his(30 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
If I highlight a sentence to help explain it, that fits the first rule: a person acts for a specific reason. The philosopher calls that intentional.
The second rule takes more care. It gives us two facts that together establish a random event: there is no specific motivation, and normal physical processes cannot explain it. Forget either part and we haven't established the result through that rule.
What we’re looking for
We're asked which inference fits the philosopher's position. There isn't a particular story to predict. We need to compare the facts in each choice with the conditions in the rules, keeping track of which action we're classifying. These rules give us ways to establish that an event is intentional or random; we shouldn't silently replace them with broader definitions of everything that could belong to either category.
Working the answers
- A
Having no specific motivation meets only one part of the stated rule for randomness. We also need an event that normal physical processes cannot explain. Keys remaining on a counter don't give us that; their staying there is perfectly ordinary. A hasn't supplied the full basis the philosopher gives for calling an event random.
- BCorrect
Ellis opens the envelope for a specific reason: to read what's inside. That is a human action performed on the basis of a motivation, so it meets the rule for an intentional event. Finding the envelope empty doesn't undo the intention. Whether the plan succeeds is different from whether the action had a purpose.
- C
Which event was motivated? Judith hailed the cab for a reason. The conclusion switches to the other driver's distraction. The choice never establishes that Judith acted with that distraction as her specific motivation. We can't carry a purpose for one event over to every consequence of it.
- D
Breathing during sleep is explainable by normal physical processes. The absence of a specific motivation therefore isn't enough to apply the rule for randomness, which requires the absence of a normal physical explanation too. Like A, this choice skips one of the stated conditions.
- E
A slippery handle explains why the wrench fell, but it doesn't supply Henry with a motivation for dropping it. The rule for intentional action concerns purpose, not merely having a physical explanation. E substitutes one kind of explanation for the one the rule requires.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.