PrepTest 127, Section 2, Question 17
Glen: An emphasis on law's purely procedural side(53 more words not shown)
The dialogue provides the most(11 more words not shown)
- Acitizens can be(11 more words not shown)
- Bvirtuousness on the(12 more words not shown)
- Cthere is an(13 more words not shown)
- Dan emphasis on(12 more words not shown)
- Ethe cultivation of(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Glen worries that focusing on legal procedure and personal rights makes people indifferent to society's welfare. He wants law's primary role to be creating virtuous citizens. But what counts as virtue, and why is creating it the job law should put first? Keeping society functioning might be another candidate for that role.
Sara presses the question of who decides. Giving law that purpose would encourage government to determine which ways of life are virtuous. People may disagree about whether a good life centers on work, raising a family, helping others, or something else. Sara sees danger in putting government in charge of that judgment.
She says that danger is greater than the danger of government being overprotective of individual rights. So she rejects Glen's proposed role for law. She doesn't need to give a complete alternative theory of law for us to understand her objection.
What we’re looking for
The question asks where they disagree. My prediction is the proposal Glen actually states: cultivating virtue should be law's primary role. He supports that assignment, and Sara argues against it.
Working the answers
- A
Neither speaker directly assesses whether people can make good choices without government interference. Glen's concern is the effect of a particular legal emphasis, and Sara's concern is giving government authority to define virtue. Those claims don't establish opposing positions on citizens' general capability.
- B
This is tempting because virtue and rights both appear in the exchange. But ranking their importance isn't the same as assigning a job to government. Sara could think virtue is extremely important and still believe government is the wrong institution to define or cultivate it. The dialogue doesn't establish that they rank the two values oppositely.
- C
Sara identifies danger, but Glen doesn't say there is none. He could acknowledge some danger and believe the benefits outweigh it. Favoring a policy doesn't commit him to thinking it carries no risk, so we don't have opposing answers from both speakers.
- D
Sara doesn't challenge Glen's first claim about procedural emphasis. Her response targets his recommendation about law's primary role. We cannot turn her silence about the earlier causal claim into a disagreement about it.
- ECorrect
Glen explicitly says law's primary role should be creating virtuous citizens. Sara objects that such a role would dangerously empower government to decide which lives count as virtuous. Her response rejects the very assignment Glen recommends.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.