Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT116 S2 Q20 Explanation

Social critic: One of the most

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

TopicsFlaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Social critic: One of the most important ways in which a society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of their immoral behavior. But in many people this shame results in deep feelings of guilt and self-loathing that can be a severe effect of increasing the total amount of suffering.

What this question is testing

Flaw

Conclusion

The critic claims moral socialization makes things worse on net — there's more total suffering because of it.

Evidence

Shame from moral socialization produces guilt and self-loathing in many people.

Evaluate

Notice the missing half of the calculation. To say moral socialization increases total suffering, you need to weigh both directions:

(1) Suffering it adds — yes, the guilt and self-loathing the critic mentions.

(2) Suffering it prevents — by curbing immoral behavior, it prevents victims from being harmed by stealing, lying, violence, etc.

The critic only counts side (1) and forgets side (2). It's like complaining that vaccines cause sore arms and concluding they make people overall less healthy — without counting the diseases they prevent.

Goal

The right answer says: moral socialization can both add some suffering (guilt) and significantly reduce overall suffering (by preventing immoral acts) — the argument ignores that.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
20.

The social critic’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds

Answer choices

  1. Bad Description3% picked this

    overlooks the possibility that the purported source of a problem could be modified to avoid that problem

    The argument doesn't make a claim about whether moral socialization could be modified to keep its benefits while reducing the guilt — that's a separate normative question. The flaw isn't about overlooking modifications; it's about ignoring the suffering-reducing effects of moral socialization in the first place.

  2. Bad Description11% picked this

    fails to address adequately the possibility that one phenomenon may causally contribute to the occurrence of another, even though the two phenomena

    This describes a flaw about overlooking partial causal relationships (X sometimes causes Y but they don't always co-occur). The argument doesn't do that — it acknowledges shame "in many people" produces guilt, not in all. The argument's flaw isn't about partial causation; it's about ignoring the suffering-reducing side of moral socialization entirely.

  3. Bad Description7% picked this

    presumes, without providing justification, that a phenomenon that supposedly increases the total amount of suffering in a society should therefore be changed or

    The argument doesn't conclude that moral socialization should be changed or eliminated. It just concludes — descriptively — that moral socialization has increased total suffering. The argument isn't making a normative recommendation; it's making an empirical claim. So a flaw about overlooking beneficial consequences when prescribing change doesn't apply.

  4. Correct64% picked this

    takes for granted that a behavior that sometimes leads to a certain phenomenon cannot also significantly reduce the

    Why this is right

    This nails the flaw. The phenomenon at issue is "total amount of suffering." Moral socialization sometimes leads to suffering (the guilt and self-loathing the argument cites). But moral socialization can also significantly reduce overall suffering — by curbing immoral acts that would have caused suffering. The argument takes for granted that the first effect is the whole story, ignoring the second. (D) names exactly that move: a behavior leads to a phenomenon in some cases yet may also significantly reduce its overall occurrence.

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

  5. Bad Description15% picked this

    presumes, without providing justification, that if many people have a negative psychological reaction to a phenomenon, then no one can have a

    The argument doesn't claim that no one can have a positive reaction to shame from moral socialization. It just claims many people have a negative reaction. The flaw isn't about overgeneralizing from "many" to "all"; it's about ignoring the suffering-reducing effects of moral socialization on society as a whole.

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