#18 - Activities that pose risks to life are acceptable if

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Parallel Reasoning—PR, SN. The correct answer choice is (C)

The stimulus here contains a biconditional principle. This can be seen by the use of the phrase “if and only if.” The correct answer should illustrate a situation that has elements from both sides of the biconditional principle: there must be a life-threatening activity that the author deems acceptable, and evidence that the risk-bearer either gains some net benefit that cannot be had without such risks, or bears the risk voluntarily. Only one of these final two conditions needs to be met in order to parallel the stimulus.

Answer Choice (A): While the decision here is voluntary, we do not know whether the older car poses a risk to the salesperson’s life. The new model may have more safety features and be safer than the old car, but that does not mean the old car is unsafe or life threatening.

Answer Choice (B): The secondhand smoke is outdoors and the danger is minimal. This does not appear to be a life-threatening activity. Even if smoking does pose a risk to life, there is nothing here illustrating either a net benefit to the people taking on the risk or that they accept the risk voluntarily.

Answer Choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. The risk of fatal injury from not wearing a helmet is certainly a risk to life. In addition, the risk is acceptable because the motorcyclist is bearing the risk voluntarily. Thus, both sides of the biconditional principle in the stimulus are met.

Answer Choice (D): This answer choice needs to show that the benefits of inexpensive, convenient travel cannot be had without these health risks. Since this answer choice leaves open the possibility that there are other ways to achieve these benefits without the health risks, it does not match the second side of the biconditional principle in the stimulus. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the health risks posed by low levels of automobile pollution are somehow life-threatening.

Answer Choice (E): The stimulus only discusses the acceptable activities that do bear a risk to life. This answer choice discusses national service, which has no risk to life. This does not match the principle in the stimulus.

[lathlee]

Admin edit: due to LSAC policies and copyright law, complete LSAT questions cannot be posted online. However, posting in this section of the forum (Test Explanations) immediately identifies the question, and eliminates the need for the text to be posted. Note: you can quote small sections of the question as needed for your question.

My problem: Now, I do not get why not Answer cohice A is the correct one even though the condition of A satisfies one of the condition bears the risks voluntarily.
According to question stem principle only A or C provides justification of an acceptable. but chose A as the final answer which was the incorrect answer. According to the answer sheeet C) is the correct answer; I understand why C) is the correct answer. But I do not understand why A) is incorrect answer: not replacing a car with more safety features compared to other available behavior option, replacing with more safety measures, does pose risks to life in some degree . The answer a is incorrect because A ) states a new model with safety features instead of that has more safety features.

[Robert Carroll]

lathlee,

Answer choice (A) is not correct because the voluntary bearing of risk to which you refer must be provided by each person who bears the risk. The salesman did it voluntarily, but we don't know that the people potentially put at greater risk by the less safe car were willing to bear that risk.

Since you see why answer choice (C) is correct, I hope that answers your question!

Robert Carroll

[PamelaO]

Hello,

I understand why C is correct now that I see that only one of the conditions (that the person gains some net benefit OR bears the risk voluntarily) need be met. At first I thought that both needed to be met, and this threw off every answer for me.

Can you just explain why D is not the answer more clearly?

Thank you,
Pamela

[Francis O'Rourke]

Hi PamelaO

Choice (D) fails the principle on two counts. We are never told if the risk is possibly fatal, so we cannot be sure that the principle even applies! Even assuming that it is a risk to life, the answer choice does not say that everyone who bears the risk gets a net benefit. We are only told that users of motor vehicles share in it. But what about pedestrians and cyclists? I would assume that people other than motor vehicle users bear the risks of emissions.

[glasann]

I eliminated A and D for different reasons than those listed above.

Is the below thinking correct?

A - while the salesperson is taking the risks voluntarily, the stimulus states that ALL at risk must bear the risks voluntarily (or else, of course, meet the other condition around net gain). While we know that the salesperson took the risks voluntarily, we don't know about the other people who could be put at risk if he were to have an accident. A car accident seems to be putting more people at risk than, say, a motorcycle accident in answer choice C where the person who is going to get the most injured would likely by the motorcyclist.

D - again, there could be other groups of people impacted that aren't being mentioned in the answer choice. It says that motor vehicle users accept the risks, but what about everyone else (children, cyclists, etc.) who aren't motor vehicle users but nonethless are impacted by pollution?

Thanks!

[KelseyWoods]

Hi glasann!

Yes, I think those are some other issues with (A) and (D). I think there are bigger issues with them--namely that the activities described do not necessarily pose risks to life. But your reasoning is also sound!

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[Adam354]

Couple different ways to invalidate answer A here.

1) is that we cannot determine the old car is at more risk of threatening life than the new car with new safety features.
However, we can still keep in mind that more safety features does imply reduced risk. So I wouldn't mark this out, but keep it on hold.

2) The other way of invalidating A, and perhaps the better way, is that the question stem mentions "each person." That each person includes other cars, who may not voluntarily choose to be put at risk by a person neglecting to update safety features. That invalidates A pretty strongly if we allow the assumption that increased safety features reduces risk.

Looking at the correct answer C then.
No motor cycle helmet increases risk to other cars LESS concretely than less safety features in a car.
Though yes, no helmet might distract other drivers and cause risk, it still seems less concrete of a risk than having more safety in a car.

Of course if we take it to the extreme, we could say cars being distracted by a crazy man without a helmet, swerving widely to keep far away from him could pose more risk than say an airbag passenger seat on or off light not working in the case when there is not a passenger in the car.

More confusingly, is the word willingly, since willingly can have some connotations that voluntarily does not have.
If they willingly agreed to not wear a helmet when their boss asked them not to, is that the same as voluntarily offering to let someone borrow their helmet?

However, sometimes I guess we can interpret words TOO creatively, and since the test gave us something clear and conrete aka "safety features," we should allow the assumption that not updating the car would pose non voluntary risk to other cars, and therefore invalidate A, making D the correct choice.

Feedback welcome

[Beth Hayden]

Hi Adam,

Declining to do something that is safer than what you're currently doing is not the same as taking a risk that threatens your life. (A) doesn't say that your current car is dangerous, just that the newer car might be safer. Inaction is only a risk if to life if not doing it carries a real chance of fatality. Remember the stimulus doesn't say anything about doing things that are more or less safe, it's just talking about activities that bring a nontrivial risk of death--think skydiving, not declining to get a backup camera in your new car.

I'm not sure if I'm understanding #2 so please let me know if I've missed the mark. The reason the stimulus mentions "each person" is because it's a principle, a general idea that applies to everyone. The answer choices are applying that principle to individual people and showing how it might play out in real life situations. The risk to life inquiry goes to the salesman, not the other people, though the fact that this is open to interpretation just demonstrates that (A) doesn't really fit here!

Similarly with (C), the risk is to the motorcyclists. He is the one choosing not to wear the helmet, and he is the one at risk of fatal injury as a result. Other cars don't play into the analysis at all.

Here, "willingly" and "voluntarily" are essentially used in the same way. The motorcycle is choosing not to wear the helmet on their own accord, so they are bearing the risk voluntarily (nothing is forcing them into that decision).

Hope that helps!
Beth