BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

LSAT CR

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:48 pm
Thanked: 6 times

LSAT CR

by punitkaur » Wed Dec 02, 2009 10:58 am
Philosopher: An action is morally right if it would be
reasonably expected to increase the aggregate
well-being of the people affected by it. An action
is morally wrong if and only if it would be
reasonably expected to reduce the aggregate wellbeing
of the people affected by it. Thus, actions
that would be reasonably expected to leave
unchanged the aggregate well-being of the people
affected by them are also right.
The philosopher's conclusion follows logically if which
one of the following is assumed?
(A) Only wrong actions would be reasonably
expected to reduce the aggregate well-being of
the people affected by them.
(B) No action is both right and wrong.
(C) Any action that is not morally wrong is morally
right.
(D) There are actions that would be reasonably
expected to leave unchanged the aggregate
well-being of the people affected by them.
(E) Only right actions have good consequences.

Confused between A and C. Can someone explain how to negate the options.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:49 pm
Location: California
Thanked: 13 times
Followed by:3 members

by heshamelaziry » Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:20 am
It is C. Good effect = right, no effect = right, bad effect = wrong. So, any action that does not have a negative effect is morally right.

Per Testluv, negation is hard and might not work in sufficient assumption, which asks about the assumption used to draw the conclusion.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:48 pm
Thanked: 6 times

by punitkaur » Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:31 am
Hi Hesham,

While C looked good to me as well. how did you eliminate A?
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:49 pm
Location: California
Thanked: 13 times
Followed by:3 members

by heshamelaziry » Wed Dec 02, 2009 11:40 am
punitkaur wrote:Hi Hesham,

While C looked good to me as well. how did you eliminate A?

The passage compares the effects of actions only. it does not state whether an action that is morally right is a right or wrong action. So, maybe an action that the writer considers wrong is morally right because it will have apositive effect on people or no negative effect, and vice versa.

For example, charging people for smoking and drinking alcohol is morally right according to the philosopher, but it is the wrong action. Although it is the wrong action, it is morally right, because it increases people's well being.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:14 am
Location: Atlanta
Thanked: 17 times

by pandeyvineet24 » Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:03 pm
IMO D. What is the reason for eliminating D ?
Think A is out, because it is stated in the argument itself.
What is OA ?
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:39 am
GMAT Score:620

by gmat620 » Wed Dec 02, 2009 8:50 pm
A is wrong because any action which is expected to reduce the aggregate well being of ppl will automatically fall into category of wrong action by definition.



Wrong Action definition:
An action
is morally wrong if and only if it would be
reasonably expected to reduce the aggregate wellbeing
of the people affected by it.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:19 am
Thanked: 1 times

by getso » Wed Dec 02, 2009 9:48 pm
Premise 1:An action is morally right if it would be reasonably expected to increase the aggregate well-being of the people affected by it.

Premise 2:An action is morally wrong if and only if it would be reasonably expected to reduce the aggregate wellbeing
of the people affected by it

Conclusion: Actions that would be reasonably expected to leave unchanged the aggregate well-being of the people
affected by them are also right

So the here author is assuming that any action/no actions that does not affect the aggregate well being are right.

C paraphrases the same Any action that is not morally wrong is morally right.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:23 am

by joseph32 » Sun May 15, 2016 10:36 pm
Looking at it now, C makes sense
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1