Exam LSAT Section 1 Logical Reasoning topic 1 question 254 discussion

Actual exam question from Test Prep's LSAT Section 1 Logical Reasoning

Question #: 254
Topic #: 1

[All LSAT Section 1 Logical Reasoning Questions]

Ethicist: Some would ban cloning on the grounds that clones would be subpeople, existing to indulge the vanity of their "originals." It is not illegal, however, to use one person as a vehicle for the ambitions of another. Some people push their children to achieve in academics or athletics. You do not have to have been born in a test tube to be an extension of someone else's ego.
The assertion that it is not illegal to use one person as a vehicle for another's ambitions is used in the ethicist's argument in which one of the following ways?

A. It supports the ethicist's view that society does not value individuality as much as many opponents of cloning think it does.
B. It supports the conclusion that forcing children to pursue academic success is not objectionable.
C. It is implied by the ethicist's conviction that clones are not subpeople.
D. It supports the ethicist's view that vanity's being the motivation for cloning is not enough of a reason to ban cloning.
E. It describes a legal position that the ethicist argues should be changed.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: D 🗳️
Another ethicist? Has anyone ever actually metan ethicist? There seems to be a bunch of them running around somewhere. Anyhow this time were asked to determine the role of a statement in the argument, so its best to keep our eye out for the arguments structural components. Some would ban cloning because clones would be a lower class of people designed to indulge the vanity of the original person. The next sentence is the assertion were to categorize. It contains the crucial Keyword "however," which essentially tells us that it will likely contain some kind of refutation of the first claim. And so it does: The counter is that we already use other people as a vehicle for personal ambitions, and its by no means illegal to do so. The ethicist provides an example of people who arent clones who are used to indulge other’s egos, but for our purposes we’ve already come upon the relevant issue: As the Keyword "however" suggests, the phrase in question supports the idea that using clones for vain purposes is not a sufficient reason to ban cloning. This is choice D.

by [deleted] at March 9, 2025, 1:37 p.m.

Comments

Submit Cancel

Currently there are no comments in this discussion, be the first to comment!