LSAT Explanation PT 44, S4, Q2: Pacifist: It is immoral to do

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following principles, if valid, would most help to justify the pacifist's reasoning? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Principle question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is B. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage and identify its structure. The pacifist presents the following premises and conclusion:

Premise 1: It is immoral to do anything that causes harm to another person.

Premise 2: Using force causes harm to another person.

Conclusion: Therefore, threatening to use force (even in self-defense) is immoral.

The argument's structure is such that it concludes that threatening to use force is immoral based on the premises that causing harm is immoral and using force causes harm. The leap from using force to threatening to use force is the main point to address in this problem.

Now, let's create an "Evaluate" question for this argument: "Is there a connection between the immorality of an action and the immorality of threatening to perform that action?"

The question type for this problem is Principle, which means we need to find an answer choice that supports or justifies the pacifist's reasoning.

Answer Choices:

a) This choice does not address the leap in logic from using force to threatening to use force. The distinction between self-defense and aggression is not relevant to the argument, as both would still involve causing harm, which the pacifist considers immoral. Therefore, this answer choice is incorrect.

b) This answer choice directly addresses the leap in logic by connecting the immorality of an action with the immorality of threatening to perform that action. If it is immoral to do something, it is also immoral to threaten to do it. This answer choice strengthens the pacifist's reasoning and is the correct choice.

c) This choice introduces a new consideration of weighing harm against good but does not address the connection between using force and threatening to use force. It does not help justify the pacifist's reasoning, so it is incorrect.

d) This answer choice contradicts the conclusion in the stimulus, as it suggests that the morality of a threat made in self-defense depends on circumstances. This does not help justify the pacifist's reasoning and is therefore incorrect.

e) This choice focuses on carrying out a threat rather than making a threat, which is the main concern of the pacifist's argument. It does not address the leap in logic between using force and threatening to use force, so it is off-topic and incorrect.

In summary, the correct answer choice is (B), as it provides a connection between the immorality of an action and the immorality of threatening to perform that action, thus strengthening the pacifist's reasoning.