- Home
- LSAT explanations
- PrepTest 138
- Section 2, Question 23
Ethicist: Only when we know a lot about(53 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(13 more words not shown)
- APeople should not(18 more words not shown)
- BWhether an act(23 more words not shown)
- CWe can be(19 more words not shown)
- DThe responsibility a(29 more words not shown)
- EIf we do(20 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Knowing why someone acted could matter to whether praise or blame is justified. But why would that settle whether we regard the action as freely performed?
The ethicist begins with a requirement: justified praise or blame requires knowing a lot about what led to the action. Knowing a lot isn't automatically enough; it's something we must have. The small phrase 'as we sometimes are' matters too. It tells us there really are cases in which praise or blame is justified.
Tolstoy's claim goes in another direction. He says that learning a lot about any action's background would make us stop regarding it as freely performed. To reject that claim using the ethicist's evidence, we need a bridge between justified praise or blame and regarding an action as free.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for an assumption that makes the rejection follow. I want a rule showing why those actual cases of justified praise or blame cannot fit Tolstoy's claim.
Working the answers
- A
This rule concerns actions caused by conditions beyond the person's control. We haven't been told that the actions in question have that kind of cause. More importantly, the argument concerns how we regard an action as we gain information, while A doesn't connect justified praise or blame with regarding the action as freely performed.
- B
A person's actual responsibility might remain unchanged no matter how much other people know. But Tolstoy's claim concerns what those other people come to regard as freely performed. A rule about actual responsibility doesn't supply the missing connection between justified judgment and that regard.
- CCorrect
Now justified praise or blame requires regarding the action as freely performed. Take one of the cases in which, the ethicist tells us, praise or blame is justified. The original premise requires that we know a lot about its background. C also requires that we regard it as free. So we have a case with both extensive knowledge and a judgment that the action was freely performed.
That contradicts Tolstoy's claim that extensive knowledge of any action would make us cease to regard it as free. The direction matters: we start with an actual justified judgment, then obtain both requirements. We aren't assuming that every freely performed action deserves praise or blame.
- D
This describes responsibility and our inclination to praise or blame, not when praise or blame is justified. It also gives no rule linking a justified judgment to regarding an action as free. The missing connection remains missing.
- E
This tells us how we regard an action when we don't know much about its background. Tolstoy's claim concerns what happens when we do know a lot. We could regard an action as free while knowing little and stop doing so after learning more. E is compatible with Tolstoy rather than establishing the ethicist's rejection.
More Sufficient Assumption questions
- PrepTest 138, Section 3, Question 15Sufficient Assumption
- PrepTest 138, Section 4, Question 22Sufficient Assumption
- Logical Reasoning Drill Set 10, Question 1Sufficient Assumption
- Logical Reasoning Drill Set 12, Question 4Sufficient Assumption
- Logical Reasoning Drill Set 13, Question 1Sufficient Assumption
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Sufficient Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.