PrepTest 129, Section 3, Question 12
Editorial: To qualify as an effective law, as(55 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- ANo one obeys(8 more words not shown)
- BIf an international(12 more words not shown)
- CThe only difference(19 more words not shown)
- DThe primary purpose(12 more words not shown)
- EOnly an international(7 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
A rule can remain on the books without doing much in practice. Imagine an old clothing restriction that nobody enforces. Under the editorial's standard, the written command alone would not make it an effective law; it needs an effective enforcement mechanism.
Police can provide that mechanism. But are police the only possibility? Countries might agree to enforce international rules together, using their own forces. An international arrangement might rely on coordinated national police or military forces rather than a separate international police force.
That is the gap in the conclusion. The editorial moves from no international police to no effective international law. Even if we accept that enforcement is required, the absence of one kind of enforcement does not show the absence of every kind.
What we’re looking for
For the required assumption, I'd look for the claim that rules out those alternatives: international law cannot be effectively enforced without an international police force. Otherwise, our proposed substitute would remain a way for the law to be effective despite the stated absence of that force.
Working the answers
- A
Someone could obey a command voluntarily, even when nobody can force compliance. The editorial can allow that while maintaining its standard that effective law requires an enforcement mechanism. It does not need the much broader claim that no person ever obeys any command without compulsion.
- B
This says creating an international police force would guarantee effective law. The needed assumption concerns whether that force is required in the first place. Even if a force would work perfectly, some other mechanism might work too. B therefore leaves the central objection unanswered. And a requirement need not be enough by itself: a force might also need authority or cooperation to be effective.
- C
International and domestic law could differ in their subjects, procedures, or many other respects. The editorial need not deny all those differences to argue that the lack of enforcement makes international law ineffective. “The only difference” adds far more than the reasoning requires.
- D
Whether enforcement is the police's primary purpose does not tell us whether other institutions can enforce international law. Police could have several purposes, in any order of importance, and the missing connection would remain. What matters is whether an international police force is the only way to enforce the law.
- ECorrect
Only an international police force could provide the required effective enforcement. If that is so, the absence of such a force means the required mechanism is absent, which supports the conclusion that international law is ineffective.
Deny this assumption and the gap reopens: another mechanism could enforce international law, so pointing out that there is no international police force would no longer establish the editorial's conclusion.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.