LSAT Explanation PT 39, S2, Q4: Marie: I gave the cashier at

LSAT Question Stem

Julia's response functions in which one of the following ways? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is C. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. Marie claims that since she did not trick, threaten, or physically force the cashier into giving her extra change, it was not morally wrong for her to keep the extra money. This is her conclusion. Julia responds by providing a counterexample, in which she explains a situation where Marie's reasoning would lead to a different conclusion. In Julia's example, if Marie mistakenly hands Julia her coat, thinking it's Julia's, Julia would not be morally entitled to keep it, even though she did not deceive, threaten, or use violence to get the coat. Julia's counterexample serves to challenge Marie's conclusion.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Are the situations of receiving extra change and mistakenly receiving someone else's coat morally equivalent?"

The question type of this problem is Flaw, and it asks us to identify how Julia's response functions in relation to Marie's argument.

a) This answer choice is incorrect because Julia does not accept Marie's principle. Instead, she challenges it by providing a counterexample to show that Marie's reasoning does not hold in all situations.

b) This answer choice is incorrect because Julia's response does not provide an additional reason to accept Marie's conclusion; rather, it challenges the conclusion.

c) This is the correct answer. Julia's response challenges Marie's conclusion by providing a relevantly similar situation (the coat example) in which the proper conclusion would be the opposite of Marie's (not morally entitled to keep the coat).

d) This answer choice is incorrect because Julia is not using Marie's criterion to solve a moral problem she faces. Instead, she is providing a hypothetical situation to challenge Marie's conclusion.

e) This answer choice is incorrect because Julia does not propose a radically different principle. She uses a counterexample to challenge Marie's conclusion, and she does not reserve judgment on whether Marie acted rightly; she indicates that Marie's reasoning is "nonsense."

In summary, Julia's response functions to challenge Marie's conclusion by providing a relevantly similar situation in which the proper conclusion would be the opposite of Marie's. The correct answer is C.