Logical Reasoning

PT12 · S1 · Q5 Oscar: I have been accused

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

Oscar: I have been accused of plagiarizing the work of Ethel Myers in my recent article.

Oscar's Conclusion

I didn't plagiarize Ethel Myers in my recent article.

Evidence

Sure I used passages from her book without attribution, but Myers gave me permission to do so, via private correspondence.

Evaluate

The question asks for a principle that justifies Oscar, so Millie's objection is not our concern. Oscar's reasoning has an evidence side and a conclusion side.

Evidence: the author gave permission to use it without attribution. Conclusion: using it that way was not plagiarism / not bad.

We want a rule to connect the two.

Goal

Let's look for a principle like,

5.

Which one of the following principles, if established, would justify Oscar’s judgment?

  1. A writer has no right

    Reversal / Negation

    This is a rule that would prove a writer doesn't have the right to quote a passage, which is the opposite of our goal. We're trying to justify Oscar's right to quote Myers' passage. This answer is an illegal negation of what we want. We want: "if you have permission, then you have the right to do it". This says: "If you don't have permission, then you don't have the right to do it."

    21% picked this

  2. The writer of an article

    Opposite

    This rule lets you say that a writers should cite the source of passages not written by them. That goes against what Oscar did. We're trying to validate Oscar. Oscar didn't cite the source. He used her passage without attribution.

    2% picked this

  3. Plagiarism is never justified, but

    Bad Trigger Match

    This rule would allow us to conclude that someone is justified in occasionally quoting another writer w/o attribution, which is what Oscar did. However, the trigger is, "If the quoted work hasn't been published" ... Do we know that Myers' book hasn't been published? No, if anything by calling it "the work of Myers" or "Myers' book", it implies it has been published. We usually call something a manuscript until it's published, and then call it a book.

    2% picked this

  4. Correct

    An author is entitled to

    Why this is right

    This lets us conclude that Oscar is entitled to quote freely without attribution another writer's work, which is exactly what Oscar did. The trigger is, "The quoted writer relinquished their exclusive right to the material". Did Myers do that? Sure. We were told that Myers gave Oscar permission to use her passages without attribution, which is a relinquishing of her exclusive right to that material. So, under this principle, that entitles Oscar to quote freely without attribution. His behavior is validated. It's unwarranted to call what he did plagiarism.

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

    74% picked this

  5. Authors are entitled to quote

    Unrelated to Goal

    This rule would allow us to conclude that someone is entitled to quote without attribution something that they have written! We're trying to justify that Oscar was allowed quote Myers without attribution, not that he was allowed to quote himself without attribution.

    2% 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