Logical Reasoning

PT115 · S2 · Q11 A gift is not generous

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

A gift is not generous unless it is intended to benefit the recipient and is worth more than what is expected or customary in the situation; a gift is selfish if it is given to benefit the giver or is less valuable than is customary.

Principle 1

not intended to benefit recipient gift not or → generous not worth more than what is expected or typical in the situation

Principle 2

given to benefit giver or → gift is selfish less valuable than customary

Evaluate

The first rule is triggered by unless, which means the same thing as "if it is not the case that".

When we see, "It is not X unless it's Y", then we could rephrase that as, . ~Y → ~X

There's a tricky aspect here, though because we're applying the "if-not" to a complex idea. If we're given, , then we're saying, .

Negating (Y and Z) turns it into ~Y or ~Z.

That makes sense, since we know that if Y is not true, then it's certainly . Similarly, as soon as we know Z is not true, then it's not the case that Y and Z are true.

Thus, becomes ~Y or ~Z → ~X

The second conditional is easier to deal with because the word "if" indicates the idea that goes on the trigger. So becomes, Y or Z → X

Goal

When we're provided with two conditional principles, the correct answer (almost?) never uses both of them. So the first thing we do when we read each answer is check to see what it's conclusion is.

If it's concluding "not generous", then we'll use rule 1 and see whether the answer choice establishes the trigger.

If it's concluding "selfish", then we'll use rule 2 and see whether the answer choice establishes that rule's trigger.

If it's concluding "it is generous" or "it isn't selfish", we'll just throw it out without reading it. These rules have no power to prove something is generous or isn't selfish.

11.

Which one of the following judgments most closely conforms to the principle above?

  1. Charles, who hates opera, was

    Bad Trigger Match

    Since this is concluding "selfish", we'll see whether the argument establishes the trigger for rule 2: -benefits the giver or - less valuable than is customary This gift seems to benefit the recipient (the cousin who loves opera is given opera tickets), and it seems to be pretty valuable (they are expensive tickets).

    18% picked this

  2. Emily gives her brother a

    Bad Trigger Match

    Since this is concluding "selfish", we'll see whether the argument establishes the trigger for rule 2: -benefits the giver or - less valuable than is customary This gift is intended to benefit the recipient (Emily "thinks this will allow her brother to get the exercise he needs"). And there's nothing here to suggest it's less valuable than is customary (a year's membership to a gym is a pretty big gift!)

    6% picked this

  3. Amanda gives each of her

    Bad Conclusion Match

    Since this is concluding "generous", we can throw this out without reading it. Rule 1 only allows us to conclude that a gift is "not generous".

    5% picked this

  4. Correct

    Olga gives her daughter a

    Why this is right

    Since this is concluding "not generous", we'll see whether the argument establishes the trigger for rule 1: -isn't intended to benefit the recipient or - isn't worth more than what's expected or customary in the situation This gift isn't worth more than what's expected or customary, because "it's the gift that all children in Olga's family receive for graduation". She was no doubt expecting that she would also get a computer when she graduates, since that had happened to all other children in the family.

    Skill tested: Principle-Conform · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    62% picked this

  5. Michael gave his nephew $50

    Bad Trigger Match

    Since this is concluding "not generous", we'll see whether the argument establishes the trigger for rule 1: -isn't intended to benefit the recipient or - isn't worth more than what's expected or customary in the situation This is certainly worth more than what's expected or customary, because it was "more than the nephew had ever been given before). And we would think that $50 was meant to benefit the recipient. There isn't any language here that would justify us thinking that Michael wasn't intending to benefit his nephew by giving him $50. The fact that the nephew lost the money would only establish that the gift didn't benefit the recipient. It doesn't show that the gift wasn't intended to benefit the recipient.

    9% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free