Logical Reasoning

PT23 · S2 · Q9 Every action has consequences

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

Every action has consequences, and among the consequences of any action are other actions.

Conclusion (so)

Good actions are impossible.

Evidence

Knowing whether an action is good requires knowing whether its consequences are good, but we cannot know the future.

Every action has consequences (including other actions).

Evaluate

When we combine with the friction-inducing pivot idea "but we cannot know the future", we can infer,

We cannot know whether an action is good

If we want to mimic the language of the conclusion, those two premises allow us to infer:

It's impossible to know whether an action is good.

The author is going from that actually inferable claim to a different type of idea in the conclusion, by saying "good actions are impossible".

Goal

Let's look for that missing link,

If it's impossible to then good know whether an → actions are action is good impossible

Or look for its contrapositive,

Good actions → Possible to know whether possible an action is good

9.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

  1. Some actions have only other

    Too Strong: only

    This answer is a strong idea that is irrelevant to the author's argument. We shouldn't be attracted to this answer given that it's getting all its language from the first sentence. (Linking answers combine language from different claims, and almost always involve language from the conclusion) If we negate this it's saying that "all actions have some consequences that are not-actions". That wouldn't hurt the author's argument at all.

    5% picked this

  2. We can know that past

    Out of Scope: past actions Contradicted

    The author never talked about past actions, so that should scare us. The author believes that good actions are impossible, so she would be contradicting herself by saying, "Some actions in the past were good actions".

    8% picked this

  3. To know that an action

    Out of Scope: refraining / bad

    The author never talks about refraining from actions or about bad actions, so both of those should make us nervous. The author already provided us a definition for knowing that an action is good (you have to know whether its consequences are good), so why would say the author is also assuming that "to know an action is good requires knowing that refraining from an action is bad".

    7% picked this

  4. Only actions can be the

    Too Strong: only

    This is just like (A). It's a strong idea that is irrelevant to the author's argument. We shouldn't be attracted to this answer given that it's getting all its language from the first sentence. (Linking answers combine language from different claims, and almost always involve language from the conclusion) If we negate this it's saying that "some consequences of actions can be non-actions". That wouldn't hurt the author's argument at all.

    6% picked this

  5. Correct

    For an action to be

    Why this is right

    The author presents two premises that we can combine and make an inference: 1. knowing an action is good requires knowing whether its consequences are good ("if you don't know whether the consequences of an action are good, then you don't know whether the action is good") + 2. We cannot know the future (i.e. "we can't know all the consequences of an action") ------------ Thus, we can't know whether an action is good. (It's impossible know whether an action is good) The author concludes on that basis that good actions are impossible. So her reasoning move was, "If it's impossible to know whether an action is good, then good actions are impossible". The contrapositive of that reasoning is, "For a good action to be possible, it must be possible to know whether an action is good".

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

    74% 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