PrepTest 153, Section 3, Question 18
In order to cut costs and thereby maximize(44 more words not shown)
The argument's conclusion is properly(9 more words not shown)
- AAny knowledgeable and(20 more words not shown)
- BAn action can(10 more words not shown)
- CMr. Kapp made(11 more words not shown)
- DIt is wrong(12 more words not shown)
- EMr. Kapp either(23 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Cheaper materials? Before calling that wrong, I'd want to know what was agreed. Perhaps the customer accepted a lower-quality version of a project because it was less expensive. A builder using a cheaper material does not, by itself, tell us that someone has been mistreated.
Then we get the crucial fact: Kapp must have realized that using these materials would put people at serious risk. Now the concern isn't merely that the building could have been nicer. It's that he knowingly exposed people to danger to increase his profit.
What we’re looking for
I can understand why the author objects. But the conclusion makes a moral judgment—this was wrong—while the supporting facts tell us what Kapp did, what he knew, and why he did it. To make the conclusion follow, connect those facts to the judgment: knowingly putting people at serious risk for profit is wrong.
Working the answers
- A
This could support the claim that an experienced builder would recognize the danger. But suppose we establish that recognition completely. We would still need the moral step: why is knowingly creating that risk for profit wrong? A addresses what Kapp would realize, not the judgment we are trying to justify.
- B
A legal action can be morally wrong. Accepting that distinction doesn't tell us which legal actions are wrong, much less why Kapp's particular action is wrong. Also, 'whether legal or not' leaves this action's legal status open. The author hasn't established legality and then asked us merely to allow that legality and wrongness can coexist.
- C
The argument gives Kapp's purpose: cutting costs to maximize profit. Whether he actually made a large profit doesn't establish whether his conduct was wrong. He could pursue that profit and fail to earn it; the question about knowingly creating serious danger would remain.
- DCorrect
Match the rule to the facts. He used inferior materials knowing they would seriously endanger people, and he did it for profit. D says that knowingly imposing that risk for that purpose is wrong. We now have a rule covering the exact action described, so the moral conclusion follows regardless of the unresolved legal question.
- E
We are already told that Kapp must have realized the danger. Saying he knew or should have known adds no moral connection between that awareness and wrongness. Like A, it stays on the knowledge side of the argument. D supplies the missing judgment about acting with that knowledge for profit.
More Sufficient Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Sufficient Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.