Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT123 S3 Q16 Explanation

Philosopher: Nations are not literally

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

TopicsMost Supported

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

Philosopher: Nations are not literally persons; they have no thoughts or feelings, and, literally speaking, they perform no actions. Thus they have no moral rights or responsibilities. But no nation can survive unless many of its citizens attribute such rights and responsibilities to it, for nothing national citizenship demands. Obviously, then, a nation _______ .

What this question is testing

Most Supported

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

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

The question
16.

Which one of the following most logically completes the

Answer choices

  1. Contradiction23% picked this

    cannot continue to exist unless something other than the false belief that the nation has moral rights motivates

    This contradicts the third premise which states that nothing else could prompt people to make the sacrifices national citizenship demands.

  2. Correct55% picked this

    cannot survive unless many of its citizens have some beliefs that

    Why this is right

    This correctly describes an S ? AMMR inference of the statements. It restates the second premise, while substituting in something known about moral rights and responsibilities.

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

  3. Out of Scope4% picked this

    can never be a target of moral praise

    Being the target of moral praise and moral blame is not discussed in the argument.

  4. Out of Scope2% picked this

    is not worth the sacrifices that its citizens make on

    Whether a nation is worth the sacrifices that its citizens make on its behalf is not discussed in the argument.

  5. Too Strong17% picked this

    should always be thought of in metaphorical rather than

    Literal thinking may preclude something necessary for the survival of a nation, but that does not mean that one should always think metaphorically.

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