to the top

#21 - If one has evidence that an act will benefit other

PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
Posts: 6670
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:19 pm
Points: 3,343

Complete Question Explanation

Must Be True—PR, SN. The correct answer choice is (C)

This author presents a simple, one-sentence conditional rule:

    Evidence of act’s prospective benefit to others
    ..... ..... ..... + ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... :arrow: ..... generally succeed in providing benefit
    Performs act to benefit others

We are asked to find the answer choice which illustrates this principle, so we should see a scenario that involves foreseeable benefit, intent to benefit others, and success in providing such benefit.

Answer choice (A): This answer choice provides no indication of any intent to benefit others, so although there is success in avoiding a confrontation, this choice does not illustrate the conditional rule (or principle) presented in the stimulus.

Answer choice (B): This choice has the first two components of the stimulus’ conditional rule (evidence of benefit and performance of act to benefit others), but because the plan was not a success, this answer fails to illustrate the rule from the stimulus.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. In this scenario, Betsy has evidence of benefit (overhearing the contractor), and seeks to benefit her daughter by changing the filters. The resulting success is the avoidance of the need for maintenance.

Answer choice (D): This incorrect answer choice has two of the three components of the conditional rule presented in the stimulus. Here, Sejal has the evidence (from psychology class) and the intent to help Bob. However, since we don’t learn of any success, this choice fails to provide an illustration of the conditional rule from the stimulus.

Answer choice (E): Like other incorrect answer choices above, this choice has two out of three components needed to reflect the principle from the stimulus. In this scenario we have the intent to benefit, along with a successful outcome. Zachary’s actions, however, were based on hope rather than evidence, so this answer choice cannot be correct.
LSAT Novice
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 12:30 pm
Points: 3

Besides being the answer that "best illustrates" the principle, can this answer choice stand on its own? I don't understand how Betsy changing the filter at her daughter's house automatically implies she is doing it for her daughters benefit...
James Finch
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
Posts: 659
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2017 5:06 pm
Points: 656

Hi Tony,

It seems like you are assuming that intention is a part of the sufficient conditions given in the stimulus. It's an easy assumption to make, given that there are other similar stimuli which do make intent a sufficient or necessary condition. Read closely, however, this one does not: our only conditions are:

1) Evidence of benefit of act to others, and;

2) Performance of said act

For all we know, Betsy could be changing the filter at her daughter's house because she has OCD, and couldn't care less whether the filter actually worked or not. Regardless, as she has both evidence of a benefit (overhearing the contractor) and performance of the beneficial act (changing the filter, we can conclude, based on the conditional relationship given in the stimulus, that she will have likely succeeded in benefiting her daughter (the furnace hasn't needed maintenance).

Hope this clears things up!