The passage provides support for which one of the following statements about the quotations in lines 52-55?

SamA October 17, 2019

Hello @srodgers151,

I had to use a dictionary to understand the difference between morality and ethics. Morals refer to an individual's own principles of right and wrong, while ethics refer to rules given by an external source, such as God or government.

If you had my limited understanding of these words, it may have actually helped you answer the question correctly. However, I'll explain why the word "ethical," even with its exact definition, does not eliminate C.

A challenge on the LSAT is knowing when to demand exact specificity, and when to allow the tone and meaning of a passage to override small differences in word choice. In reading comprehension, you will often have to do the latter.

Lines 52-55: King notes that there are two types of laws, just and unjust; he describes a just law as a "code that squares with the moral law" and an unjust law as a "code that is out of harmony with the moral law."

If answer choice C had used "moral standards" rather than "ethical standards," then it is clearly the right answer. You are correct that the word ethical is not used in the passage. However, the transcendentalist concept of "higher law" is discussed in the last paragraph. It is a supreme law that is above the laws of the nation, by which the nation's laws should be judged. King refers to it as "moral law." This supreme code is the external source that makes the use of "ethical" correct and applicable to the passage.

srodgers151 October 17, 2019

I appreciate you researching so that you could answer my questions. Ultimately, I think you are right when you say that the reader has to make a choice about how exacting to be when reading. However, the LSAT is inconsistent with how exacting the test taker should be.

Finally, at the risk of becoming pedantic, I will push back on your characterization of higher law as external. Higher law and moral law as referred to in the passage reference humanity's intrinsic, universal, rights which govern behavior from within. This is implied in the passage in lines 41-45. If higher law were not intrinsic - it could not be used to challenge the federal laws mentioned. Higher law is not externally codified - that's what differentiates it from actual (positive) laws.

SamA October 28, 2019

Hello @srodgers151,

I consulted the other tutors, here is further explanation from Irina.

"I think the key here is that the passage never talks about morality, hence it is not a question of morality v ethics distinction, but it only talks about moral law, which is not the same as morals/ morality. Moral law is defined as: Moral law is a system of guidelines for behavior. These guidelines may or may not be part of a religion, codified in written form, or legally enforceable. For some people moral law is synonymous with the commands of a divine being. For others, moral law is a set of universal rules that should apply to everyone.
Ethical principles held primarily by the followers of Christianity have influenced the development of U.S. secular law” I also looked up the full MLK quote and sure enough it confirms that moral law is equivalent to divine/ or external law “: “A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.“

srodgers151 October 28, 2019

You guys are great, thanks

Austin1 September 16 at 05:39PM

@SamA I came here looking for an explanation about this as well, and I appreciate you explanation as to why C is correct here and the typical distinctions between ethics and moral are not applied here. That said, it still seems odd that a test which is so concerned with careful reading and understanding the essential logic of its stimulus and questions would those philosophical terms so imprecisely. It's true that Christian philosophical principles of ethics and morals both influence the Western legal tradition, however, even using your definition of ethical vs. moral law, at 52-55 King is clearly talking about a morals and not ethics. His analysis may inform his or others' ethics and behavior, but that doesn't change the fact that the quotes clearly discuss the interaction between secular laws and what King referred to as "moral law" and the Transcendentalists in the passage refer to as "higher law." That's not a discussion of behavior, that's a discussion of universal truths (i.e. morals).

As I said, I appreciate the clarity from this series of posts, but this question in particular seems absurdly loose in its use of words with definite meanings in philosophy and common usage without clearly defining them in some way in the stimulus to ensure that the test taker could reasonably be expected to understand that the LSAT is redefining the word "morals" as used in the passage to roughly approximate "ethics" as used in one of five answers to a single question...