PrepTest 139, Section 1, Question 16
Roxanne promised Luke that she would finish their(60 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(5 more words not shown)
- Aif Roxanne believes(23 more words not shown)
- Bit would not(18 more words not shown)
- Cif Luke would(24 more words not shown)
- Dif Luke would(23 more words not shown)
- ELuke would not(16 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Does a changed deadline change the promise?
Roxanne promised to finish the report while Luke was away. Now the deadline has moved. The lunch example helps us see how that change might matter: a friend wouldn't expect you to keep a lunch date if you became ill, so missing it under those circumstances wouldn't be wrong. The argument allows a promise to be left unfulfilled when changed circumstances remove the other person's expectation.
What we’re looking for
Carry that reasoning back to Roxanne, but keep the condition. We don't know from the postponed deadline alone what Luke would expect. The completion should say that if Luke wouldn't expect Roxanne to finish under the new circumstances, failing to finish wouldn't be wrong. That would excuse her failure to keep the original promise, just as the illness excuses missing lunch.
Working the answers
- A
This substitutes Roxanne's belief about Luke's expectations for Luke's expectations themselves. The lunch example says what the friend would expect, not merely what you think the friend would expect. A also concludes it would be wrong to finish the report. The example excuses failing to do something; it doesn't condemn doing it.
- B
This excuses finishing the report, while the lunch example excuses missing the lunch. It also asks whether Luke expected the deadline to be postponed, rather than whether Luke would still expect Roxanne to finish the report. Both the relevant expectation and the action being excused have changed.
- C
This considers the case in which Luke would still expect the report to be finished. The example tells us what follows when the friend's expectation is absent; it doesn't establish a rule for every case in which the expectation remains. C therefore doesn't carry across the particular reasoning we're given.
- DCorrect
Luke's lack of expectation corresponds to the friend's not expecting an ill person at lunch. Roxanne's failure to finish corresponds to missing the lunch. In both cases, the argument says that failing to fulfill the original promise wouldn't be wrong if the other person wouldn't expect fulfillment under the changed circumstances.
- E
We aren't told outright that Luke no longer expects the report. The answer needs to preserve that as a condition. E also says finishing the report would be wrong, which is stronger and different from saying that failing to finish would be permissible. The lunch example supports the latter kind of claim.
More Parallel Reasoning questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Reasoning questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.