February 1992 LSAT Section 4 Question 18

Zeida: Dr. Ladlow, a research psychologist, has convincingly demonstrated that his theory about the determinants of r...

RachP on May 26, 2022

General Principle

Would the general principle be in this case, the "responsible psychologist"? Also, if saying he is not responsible, how is that not deemed an attack on his character?

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Emil-Kunkin on June 1, 2022

Hi RachP

Yep! I think the general principle is that a responsible psychologist would never make such a conclusion. I don't think that this attack would be considered an attack on his character. An attack on his character would be an argument that uses his poor character as a premise- here the author concludes that he is not responsible on the basis of professional standards. Furthermore, the argument is about his professional standards as a doctor, not saying that he is a bad person.