PrepTest 110, Section 4, Question 21
Philosopher Denise Meyerson views the Critical Legal Studies(440 more words not shown)
It can be inferred from(25 more words not shown)
- AIt incorporates moral(10 more words not shown)
- BIt does not(8 more words not shown)
- CIt is insufficient(10 more words not shown)
- DIt is comparable(8 more words not shown)
- EIt can be(9 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
Now we're being asked for CLS's view, not Meyerson's. CLS says conflicting legal values yield equally plausible opposing answers, leaving no uniquely determined solution. I'd expect something about the law being unable, by itself, to settle which answer to choose.
Working the answers
- A
“Definitive solutions” goes the wrong way. CLS doubts that the law determines a single answer; it doesn't say moral principles enable it to do so.
- B
This resembles Meyerson's distinction between applying rules and endorsing them. The hypothetical CLS scholar instead says that appealing to considerations of purpose, policy, and value means endorsing them.
- CCorrect
If the law generates opposing answers without determining which to choose, it is insufficient by itself to settle the question. That fits the CLS position we predicted.
- D
The game analogy belongs to Meyerson. The CLS scholar expressly objects that legal cases are unlike games.
- E
Ranking values to resolve a case is Meyerson's response to CLS. The movement is presented as denying that the conflicting values determine the best answer. This assigns her response to the side she is criticizing.
More Author's Opinion questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Author's Opinion questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.