Logical Reasoning

PT116 · S2 · Q15 Kendrick: Governments that try to

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

Start practicing free

Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so, since such advertisements encourage people to engage in an unhealthy practice.

Given that ...

Kendrick thinks that governments are justified in trying to prevent cigarettes from being advertised,

How can it also be that ...

Kendrick thinks that cigarette ads should remain legal?

Evaluate

Of all the Paradox questions I've done, this one ranks 2nd for me I think in terms of difficulty in sorting out what the intended paradox is to begin with.

Kendrick is talking about cigs and about fatty foods, and so a lot of people think the paradox has to do with cigs vs. fatty foods, but there's no conflict there.

Kendrick thinks that advertisements for both encourage people to engage in unhealthy practices. Ads for fatty foods are legal, so Kendrick's recommendation that ads for cigs be legal as well is entirely consistent.

Like almost all Paradox paragraphs, a pivot word (But) indicates where the surprising idea is coming from .

But ... ads for cigs should remain legal.

Okay, what does that conflict with? The only thing before that pivot that sounded like ads for cigs should not remain legal was when Kendrick claimed that governments are justified (i.e. correct) in trying to prevent cigarettes from being advertised.

Goal

We need an answer that helps reconcile with "they should not make the ads illegal".

15.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent conflict between Kendrick's statements?

  1. Any advertisement that encourages people

    Contradicts: should be illegal

    This would contradict one of the two statements we're trying to reconcile. We're trying to reconcile 1. govt should try to prevent ads for cigs 2. govt should not made those ads illegal

    5% picked this

  2. The advertisement of fattening foods,

    Unrelated to Goal

    There was no apparent conflict between what Kendrick said about fatty foods and what he said about cigarettes. This answer is acting like Kendrick had a double-standard -- one thing should be true for cigarettes, but a different thing should be true for fatty foods -- and this answer sounds like it's trying to justify that different treatment. But Kendrick didn't have a double standard. He seemed to think that cigarette ads and fatty food ads were similar cases that should be treated similarly. There was no conflict there to explain.

    17% picked this

  3. Most advertisements should be legal,

    No Impact

    This is too generic to resolve the conflict about ads for cigarettes. Sure, most ads should be legal, but the ones we would probably consider the exceptions are the ones where advertisers are lying to people or encouraging people to do something harmful. The idea that advertisers are morally responsible doesn't fit this paradox. That would help explain someone who is saying, "Governments should not try to prevent these ads. It's the advertisers' moral responsibility to prevent them if the advertisers think the ads might encourage unhealthy practices."

    8% picked this

  4. Correct

    Governments should try to prevent

    Why this is right

    This helps us to reconcile these two claims: 1. government should try to prevent ads for cigarettes' 2. government should not made those ads illegal If Kendrick thinks governments should try to prevent ads for cigarettes, but not by making them illegal, then he must think that they should try to prevent them some other way, such as taxes / fees / fines.

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

    42% picked this

  5. Governments should place restrictions on

    Contradicts: should not try preventing

    This would contradict the first of the two statements we're trying to reconcile. We're trying to reconcile 1. government should try to prevent ads for cigarettes' 2. government should not made those ads illegal And this answer is saying that "governments should not try to prevent ads for cigarettes'".

    28% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

Save and practice this skill
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