Reading Comprehension

PT145 · S1 · P2 · Q11 Corporate Crime

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension 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

The following passage is adapted from an article published in 1993.

Topic

How we should determine penalties for corporate crimes (like when corporations profit from selling harmful products)

Framework

Challenge Position

Main Point

The economist’s idea that penalties for corporate crimes should only be set by ensuring the fine exceeds the profit from the crime is impractical, because it ignores the need to factor in detection rates and moral considerations; in reality, we need to include more than a simple cost/benefit calculation if we want fair and workable punishments. Most Valuable Sentence: (Last paragraph)

P1: Introduces the Economists’ Approach

Some economists say that the only thing that should matter when deciding fines for corporate crimes is math: the fine just needs to be higher than whatever profit the company made from wrongdoing.

P2: Expanding on the Economists’ View

These economists believe that how much society hates a specific crime (like selling tainted food) shouldn’t impact the penalty—just the impact on the company’s finances.

P3: The Author Pushes Back—It’s Not That Simple

The author starts to poke holes in this idea, pointing out you have to consider how often these crimes are actually detected. If companies think they won’t often get caught, a small fine won’t stop them from taking the risk. So, the “just” fine would have to multiply up—maybe needing to be $60 million instead of $7 million if only 1 in 10 get caught.

11.

The author ascribes which one of the following views to the economists discussed in the passage?

A community’s moral judgment of
Too Strong
Too Strong: most reliable Outside Support Window None of the four claims discuss when a community's moral judgment would be most reliable. - sole basis for penalty should be cost and benefit - a $7 million fine on $6 million of illicit profits would be justice - the fact that we may find some crimes more 'evil' than others should not be a factor in determining penalties - law should affect corporations' earnings, not assess morality
4% picked this
A community’s moral judgment of
Contradicted
These economists don't think that a community's moral judgment should affect penalties at all. The 1st and 3rd ideas contradict this answer. - sole basis for penalty should be cost and benefit - a $7 million fine on $6 million of illicit profits would be justice - the fact that communities may find some crimes more 'morally objectionable' than others should not be a factor in determining penalties - law should affect corporations' earnings, not assess morality
3% picked this
A community’s moral judgment of
Unsupported Comparison
Unsupported Comparison: more severe Outside Support Window None of the four claims compare a community's moral judgment to the severity of actual penalties levied. - sole basis for penalty should be cost and benefit - a $7 million fine on $6 million of illicit profits would be justice - the fact that communities may find some crimes more 'morally wrong' than others should not be a factor in determining penalties - law should affect corporations' earnings, not assess morality
5% picked this
A community’s moral judgment of
One-Word Off
The economists would say that a community's moral judgment is irrelevant to assessing the penalties we should assess for corporate crimes. But the economists never speak about whether communities could be involved in assessing morality.
15% picked this
Correct
A community’s moral judgment of
Why this is right
The 1st and 3rd ideas prove this answer. - sole basis for penalty should be cost and benefit - a $7 million fine on $6 million of illicit profits would be justice - the fact that communities may find some crimes more 'morally objectionable' than others should not be a factor in determining penalties - law should affect corporations' earnings, not assess morality If the sole basis for penalties should be cost and benefit, and the community's moral judgment should not be a factor, then it's fair to say the economists would think that using a community's moral judgment to assess penalties is inappropriate.
Skill tested: Non-Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.
73% 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