Logical Reasoning

PT126 · S1 · Q16 Philosopher: An event is intentional

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

Philosopher: An event is intentional if it is a human action performed on the basis of a specific motivation.

Given

An event is intentional if it is HA + SM → I a human action performed on the basis of a specific motivation.

An event is random if it is ~SM + ~NPP → R not performed on the basis of a specific motivation and it is not explainable by normal physical processes.

Goal

If an answer choice is concluding that something was "intentional" we'll check to see whether it was a human action with a specific motivation.

If an answer choice is concluding that something was "random", we'll check to see whether had no specific motivation and isn't explainable by normal physical processes.

If it's concluding anything else, we'll just automatically eliminate the answer.

16.

Which one of the following inferences conforms most closely to the philosopher's position?

  1. Tarik left the keys untouched

    Wrong Trigger

    This appeals to the second of SM → R the philosopher’s principles. However, it fails to meet the trigger, since it does not include that the event is not explainable by normal physical processes.

    4% picked this

  2. Correct

    Ellis tore the envelope open

    Why this is right

    This conforms to the first HA + SM → I principle in the philosopher’s position. Ellis acted on the basis of a specific motivation and the action was performed by a human, so it follows that the event was intentional.

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

    90% picked this

  3. Judith's hailing a cab distracted

    Wrong Outcome

    Judith did perform a human HA + SM → I action and it was performed with a specific motivation. However, the conclusion is that the driver’s becoming distracted was an intentional event, when it should be that Judith’s hailing a cab was an intentional event.

    3% picked this

  4. Yasuko continued to breathe regularly

    Wrong Trigger

    Yasuko performed a human action ~SM → R that was not performed on the basis of a specific motivation. Without knowing whether the evil is explainable by normal physical processes. It cannot be concluded that the event was random.

    2% picked this

  5. Henry lost his hold on

    Wrong Trigger

    It could be argued that losing HA + NPP → I one's hold on the wrench and dropping it is an action that is not performed with a specific motivation. Regardless, the information does not state for sure whether the action was performed with a specific motivation. So it cannot be concluded that Henry's action was an international event.

    1% 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