PrepTest 132, Section 3, Question 25
Computers have long been utilized in the sphere(437 more words not shown)
It can be most reasonably(26 more words not shown)
- AFocusing on the(15 more words not shown)
- BContemporary computers do(16 more words not shown)
- CQuestions of interpretation(16 more words not shown)
- DLegal statutes and(18 more words not shown)
- EAs professionals continue(19 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
What ability is missing? The systems need to handle interpretation when a situation doesn't fit neatly into predefined categories. My prediction is an answer about that need for judgment. It still has to follow from the described problem, rather than propose our own favorite fix.
Working the answers
- A
Focusing on legal rules describes the first approach, but the second approach uses cases and still faces a difficulty. The broader problem is the missing interpretive ability, not simply the decision to start with doctrine.
- B
Computer memory isn't identified as the obstacle. Storing more information and judging how information applies are different problems.
- C
Adding more rules might sound like a solution, but the author doesn't say interpretation must be settled that way. Indeed, the discussion emphasizes unforeseen situations and the limits of fixed criteria. We shouldn't supply a solution the author hasn't endorsed.
- DCorrect
Statutory concepts may be left undefined to accommodate “unforeseen circumstances.” The systems therefore need to apply rules to novel situations, while case-based programs need to discover relevant similarities for themselves. Together, those points support the idea that innovative applications can escape a fixed set of rules, cases, or criteria.
- E
The difficulty isn't blamed on legal professionals being unfamiliar with the software. Practice by users doesn't, by itself, supply a capability the programs lack.
More Application questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Application questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.