#25 - Concept Reference, Must Be True

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

The correct answer choice is (D).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[LSAT4Life]

Hi,

I wanted to confirm to thought process in eliminating (B) which states a conditional relationship:

Refrain from wrongdoing individual criminal prosecution

I think (B) is wrong because a) P2 doesn't specifically state a conditional relationship and b) if I extrapolate an implied conditional relationship, it's more saying that individual criminal prosecution refrain from wrongdoing?

[atierney]

Hello,

Yes, to the conditional relationship. Good eyes on catching that. I also agree that the P2 doesn't state or imply this conditional relationship, and therefore, it would be eliminated on those grounds. In terms of the implied conditional relationship, I wouldn't necessarily go that far with the analysis of both P2 and the answer choice itself. I think, generally, in order to infer a conditional relationship from a passage, you would need pretty clear evidence that the passage is implying such conditionality. Thus, once you're aware that such evidence is not present, you can feel confident that the answer choice is not likely to be a contender as the correct answer choice at large.

Let me know if you have further questions on this.

[blaisebayno]

Hi there,

I honestly need some help understanding why A, B, and C are wrong. They all seem correct to me. I also don't really understand why D is better than any of them. Thanks whoever helps me!

[katehos]

Hi Blaise!

In order to understand why (A), (B), and (C) are wrong, let's take a look at the portion of the passage that discusses proponents of individual criminal prosecution. This discussion takes place in the third paragraph and the author states that the proponents of individual prosecution "maintain that individuals are more responsive to deterrence", individuals "generally fear prosecution and the loss of employment", and that punishing a corporation via a fine punishes a variety of people, including the public because of "higher prices." So, our prephrase should be any of these things!

Getting into the answer choices, we see that (A) outlines the belief that shareholders don't have power to influence the corporation. This was not something attributed to the proponents of individual prosecution (in fact, we have no idea whether proponents of individual prosecution believe this or not), so we can eliminate this answer.

Moving to (B), the belief discussed is that employees refrain from wrongdoing only if they are subject to individual prosecution. While the proponents of individual prosecution believe that individuals are deterred from wrongdoing because of the threat of punishment, we do not know whether or not proponents believe this is the ONLY reason corporate employees would refrain from wrongdoing. What if they have their own moral considerations? Ultimately, this answer choice is much too strong and not supported by the text, so it can also be eliminated.

Turning our attention to (C), we see that this answer choice discusses the relative difficulty of corporate prosecution versus individual prosecution. Nothing in the passage attributes this belief to proponents of individual prosecution so it can be eliminated.

Now, to our correct answer! Answer choice (D) states that proponents of individual prosecution believe it is unfair for the public to pay higher costs as a result of criminal prosecution. This is part of our prephrase! At the end of the third paragraph, we see that the punishment of corporations as a whole "essentially punishes... the public, which is forced to absorb higher prices." So, we know this answer is correct because it has textual support.

I hope this helps
Kate

[knelchr]

I am confused why answer choice D is correct because I initially thought it went too far in describing the position held by the proponents of individual criminal prosecution. Since this is a must be true question, I would expect the author to more clearly attribute to this group the belief that criminal sanctions on corporations are "unjust." I can see how this might be implied by the sentence, "...[P]unishment of a corporation, in the form of a fine, essentially punishes shareholders, creditors, employees who may be laid off, and ultimately the public, which is forced to absorb higher prices." However, this doesn't really seem like a clear-cut ethical judgement. Can someone please help explain.

[Amber Thomas]

Hi Knelchr!

You are exactly right to cite the quote: “Additionally, [proponents of individual criminal prosecution] say punishment of a corporation, in the form of a fine, essentially punishes shareholders, creditors, employees who may be laid off, and ultimately the public, which is forced to absorb higher prices.”

This line is used as an argument against criminal prosecution of corporations. In order to for this premise to effectively contribute to this argument, we have to assume that the fact that the public will ultimately bear the price for corporate misconduct is wrong or bad in some way. Otherwise, there would be no real point in bringing it up. Therefore, it isn’t a leap to claim that the public bearing the cost of corporate misconduct is considered “unjust” by proponents of individual criminal prosecution, as Answer Choice D indicates.

I hope this helps!