LSAT Explanation PT 20, S1, Q22: To hold criminals responsible for their

LSAT Question Stem

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is E. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

The LSAT problem presents an argument that claims holding criminals responsible for their crimes is a failure to recognize that all actions are products of the environment that formed the agent's character. It goes on to say that the law-abiding majority creates and maintains this environment, so they are the ones truly responsible for crime. The question type is a Flaw question, asking us to identify the flaw in the argument's reasoning.

Let's break down the argument:

1. Premise: Criminal actions, like all actions, are products of the environment that formed the agent's character.

2. Premise: The law-abiding majority creates and maintains this environment.

3. Conclusion: The law-abiding majority is truly responsible for crime.

To help understand the argument, let's use a simple example. Imagine a garden where various plants grow. The environment (soil, water, sunlight) determines how well the plants grow. Now, if we blame the plants (criminals) for not growing well, we are ignoring the fact that the environment (law-abiding majority) is responsible for their growth.

Our "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Are the law-abiding majority's actions the only factor influencing the environment that forms an individual's character?"

Now, let's discuss the answer choices:

a) The argument does not exploit any ambiguity in the term "environment." It consistently refers to the surroundings or conditions that influence a person's character. This choice is incorrect.

b) The argument does distinguish between socially acceptable and unacceptable actions by acknowledging the existence of criminal and law-abiding individuals. This choice is incorrect.

c) The argument does not focus on how one becomes a criminal but rather where the blame lies for their actions. This choice is not related to the main line of reasoning and is incorrect.

d) The argument does not rely on statistical evidence or generalizations from a small minority of the population. It is an abstract discussion of criminals and the law-abiding majority. This choice is incorrect.

e) This is the correct answer choice. The argument contradicts itself by first claiming that no one can be blamed for their actions due to the environment's influence, and then placing blame on the law-abiding majority. This internal contradiction is the flaw in the argument's reasoning.