PrepTest 145, Section 2, Question 21
Principle: If one does not criticize a form(38 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(9 more words not shown)
- ABoth McFeney and(13 more words not shown)
- BMcFeney is regularly(7 more words not shown)
- CMcFeney often criticizes(15 more words not shown)
- DShimada criticizes McFeney(11 more words not shown)
- ENeither McFeney nor(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Is Shimada tardy himself? If someone never arrives late, asking that person to promise to stop being late would be a strange response to a complaint about someone else's lateness.
The principle is aimed at hypocrisy: if you neither criticize a behavior in yourself nor vow to stop it, you shouldn't criticize that behavior in someone else. The application says that if Shimada doesn't promise to stop being tardy, he shouldn't criticize McFeney's tardiness.
What we’re looking for
To justify that application, we need to check Shimada's own behavior against the rule. What is he doing about his own lateness? Facts about McFeney alone won't tell us whether the restriction applies to Shimada.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Shimada is regularly tardy and doesn't criticize that behavior in himself. Now apply the condition in the proposed conclusion: if he also doesn't vow to stop, he does neither of the things the principle requires him to address before criticizing someone else. The rule then tells us he should not criticize McFeney.
His own tardiness answers my initial question, but the absence of self-criticism is also essential. The application already concerns the case where he makes no vow; A supplies the missing fact about the other way of addressing his behavior.
- B
Being almost never tardy doesn't tell us whether Shimada criticizes his occasional lateness. If he does, the absence of a promise to stop isn't enough to trigger this rule. B doesn't establish the combination needed for the application.
- C
McFeney criticizing Shimada is not Shimada criticizing himself. Even though neither promises to stop, we still don't know whether Shimada criticizes his own behavior. The principle concerns how the person making the criticism handles that behavior in himself, not whether someone else has complained about him.
- D
This expressly says Shimada criticizes his own tardiness. So even without a vow to stop, we cannot say he does neither. The rule's restriction doesn't apply on these facts. That doesn't prove all of his criticism is justified; it means this particular principle doesn't establish the proposed prohibition.
- E
Neither person being regularly tardy doesn't settle whether Shimada criticizes whatever lateness he does have. Frequency alone isn't enough. A supplies both his own relevant behavior and the absence of self-criticism, which E leaves unresolved.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.