Logical Reasoning

PT133 · S1 · Q15 Counselor: Hagerle sincerely apologized

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

Counselor: Hagerle sincerely apologized to the physician for lying to her.

Conclusion

Hagerle owe me a sincere apology too.

Evidence

Hagerle told the same lie to me and to the physician, and Hagerle gave the physician a sincere apology.

Evaluate

This makes use of the famous principle every kid uses when their sibling is getting something they're not getting:

In this case, the principle should probably sound something like,

Goal

We want to find a principle whose trigger applies to this situation and whose outcome would strengthen or prove the idea that this counselor should also get a sincere apology from Hagerle.

15.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the counselor's reasoning?

  1. It is good to apologize

    Too Weak

    Hagerle is clearly capable of a sincere apology, since he gave one to the physician. So according to this rule, "it was good for Hagerle to apologize" to the physician. We're not sure if Hagerle is capable of sincerely apologizing to the counselor, and even if we knew that, this answer would only establish that "it would be good for Hagerle to apologize", which is a little weaker than "Hagerle owes me an apology".

    0% picked this

  2. If someone tells the same

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This is not a rule that provides an outcome like "both are owed an apology". We could translate this into this form: You tell the same lie ? owe them both apology to two diff people or owe neither an apology That doesn't help us prove that Hagerle owes this counselor an apology, but we were never told that the physician was owed an apology, only that she received an apology. Another way to symbolize this rule, which has a "nested unless" is to add the unless (in typical "if-not" fashion) to the trigger: told same lie to two diff people don't owe and ? apology to don't owe apology to both either This rule also doesn't get as specific as the conclusion does (apology vs. sincere apology), so it would also be weak in that regard.

    3% picked this

  3. Correct

    Someone is owed a sincere

    Why this is right

    The "if" signifies the beginning of the conditional's trigger, so this rule looks like this: someone else has received you are owed a sincere apology for the ? a sincere same lie you were told apology We can definitely match up the trigger. The physician has already received a sincere apology from Hagerle for the same lie that was told to this author. Thus, according to this rule, our author is owed a sincere apology from Hagerle.

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

    91% picked this

  4. If one is capable of

    Bad Trigger Match

    This rule has the right outcome, but we can't clearly establish that the trigger applies. It says: X is capable of sincerely ? X owes Y a apologizing to Y sincere apology Were we told in the evidence that Hagerle is capable of sincerely apologizing to the counselor? No. For all we know they used to date, it ended badly, and Hagerle cannot bring himself to apologize to the counselor.

    3% picked this

  5. A person should not apologize

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This rule only allows us to conclude that someone "should not apologize", so it will be useless to us. It looks like this: X can't apologize to all X should not others whom X told the ? apologize to one of lie to people X lied to We want a rule that's like X can apologize to ? X should apologize to one of the people X lied to all X told the lie to This answer choice only has the power to say, "If you can't apologize to the counselor, then you shouldn't have apologized to the physician".

    3% 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