Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Even if there's no proof the police chief was corrupt, they should still be blamed for the corruption in their department simply because they've been the boss for so long.

Conclusion: The police chief should be held responsible for the corruption in the department.

Reasoning: The chief has headed the department for a very long time, and the lack of evidence of their personal involvement does not change their accountability.

Analysis: The argument relies on the principle of 'command responsibility,' where a leader is held liable for the actions of their subordinates. It dismisses the lack of direct evidence as irrelevant to the question of accountability. To justify this, we need a principle that explicitly links a long tenure in a leadership position to responsibility for the organization's overall conduct. It’s the 'captain of the ship' mentality—if the ship hits an iceberg, the captain is responsible even if they weren't at the wheel.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

4.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the argument?

Correct Answer
E
It states that long tenure in authority leaves no excuse that can absolve responsibility for widespread corruption among subordinates. That directly underwrites holding the chief accountable despite no evidence of involvement.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep