LSAT Explanation PT 36, S3, Q20: Critic: Although some people claim it
LSAT Question Stem
Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the critic's reasoning?
Logical Reasoning Question Type
This is a Principle question.
Correct Answer
The correct answer to this question is B.
LSAT Question Complete Explanation
This LSAT problem presents an argument that concludes it is consistent to support freedom of speech while also supporting legislation limiting the amount of violence in TV programs. The reasoning provided is that the damage done by violent TV programs is more harmful than the decrease in freedom of speech that would result from the proposed limitations. The question type for this problem is "Principle", as we are asked to find a principle that helps justify the critic's reasoning.
Let's examine each answer choice and see how they relate to the argument:
a) In evaluating legislation that would impinge on a basic freedom, we should consider the consequences of not passing the legislation.
While this answer choice is relevant to the argument and suggests that we should consider the consequences of not passing the legislation, it does not directly address the consistency of supporting both freedom of speech and the limiting legislation. Thus, it is not the best choice to justify the critic's reasoning.
b) One can support freedom of speech while at the same time recognizing that it can sometimes be overridden by other interests.
This answer choice directly addresses the consistency issue raised by the argument. It suggests that supporting freedom of speech does not necessarily mean that it cannot be overridden by other interests, such as limiting violent TV programs. This principle aligns with the critic's reasoning and helps justify the argument, making it the correct answer.
c) When facing a choice between restricting freedom of speech or not, we must decide based on what would make the greatest number of people the happiest.
This answer choice introduces a new criterion for decision-making: the happiness of the greatest number of people. However, this criterion is not mentioned in the argument, and it does not directly address the consistency issue. Therefore, it is not a helpful principle for justifying the critic's reasoning.
d) If the exercise of a basic freedom leads to some harm, then the exercise of that freedom should be restricted.
This answer choice suggests that we should support the limiting legislation due to the harm caused by violent TV programs. However, it does not address the consistency of supporting both the legislation and freedom of speech. Therefore, it does not provide a helpful principle for justifying the critic's reasoning.
e) In some circumstances, we should tolerate regulations that impinge on a basic freedom.
Similar to answer choice (d), this choice suggests that we should support the limiting legislation in certain circumstances. However, it does not address the consistency of supporting both the legislation and freedom of speech. Thus, it does not provide a helpful principle for justifying the critic's reasoning.
In summary, the best principle to justify the critic's reasoning is answer choice (b), as it directly addresses the consistency issue raised by the argument and supports the idea that freedom of speech can sometimes be overridden by other interests.