Logical Reasoning

PT149 · S3 · Q3 Many employers treat their employees fairly

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

Many employers treat their employees fairly.

Conclusion (thus)

Using others as a means to one's own ends is not always morally reprehensible or harmful to others.

Evidence

Many employers treat their employees fairly.

Evaluate

What a weird, sparse argument. First, let's focus on our burden of proof if we're trying to prove a claim that Doing X is not always Y or Z

To prove this claim, we just need at least one example in which X is done, but neither Y nor Z happen.

So this author has to establish - Person A used Person B as a means to A's ends - B was not harmed - this was not morally reprehensible

In the author's example of employers treating employees fairly, has she established any of these things? No.

Goal

Look for an answer saying, in these cases of employers treating employees fairly, - the employer was using the employee as a means to their ends - the employee was not harmed - this arrangement was not morally reprehensible

3.

The argument requires the assumption that

  1. some employers act in a

    Too Strong: only when

    This argument is only concerned with a time when employers aren't acting in a morally reprehensible way. The author doesn't need to assume anything about the cases in which (or frequency with which) employers do act morally reprehensible. It wouldn't hurt this argument at all to negate this and say, "hey, author, sometimes employers act in morally reprehensible ways with people who aren't employees". The author would be like, "Sure. That's true. So what?"

    5% picked this

  2. no employers who act morally

    Too Strong: no employers

    The author is only saying that "many" employers treat their employees fairly, and using them as a counterexample to a general principle. She doesn't have to assume anything about the total set of all employers who act morally.

    5% picked this

  3. Correct

    some or all employers use

    Why this is right

    In positive form, this answer is just suggesting, "The author was assuming that the crap he said about employers treating employees fairly is somehow relevant to the stuff he's talking about in the conclusion about using someone as a means to their own ends". This was one of the three possible answers we predicted. If we negated this, it would say "no employers ever use their employees as a means to their own ends", which would destroy this argument by making the example of "fair employers" completely irrelevant to a generalization about "using people as a means to your own ends".

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

    82% picked this

  4. making a profit from the

    Too Strong

    Too Strong: never Out of Scope: profit The author never discusses profit and certainly never commits herself to a crazy-extreme claim that "profiting from others' labor is never harmful"

    3% picked this

  5. it is not possible to

    Too Strong: impossible

    The author never commits to an extreme position like "it's impossible to harm someone else unless you're treating them as a means to your ends". I'm pretty sure the author is still okay with saying "punching someone in the face harms them". Nothing in her paragraph ruled that out.

    5% 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