Reading comp PrepTest 114 · Section 3 · Question 10

Topic: Legal

Paragraph 1

• Paragraph note
  • Background on intellectual (good arguments) and institutional authority (institutional enforcement); view that law relies on intellectual authority
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Comparison between intellectual and institutional authority, according to the author:
    • Intellectual: relies on good reasoning, not pressure or norms (first sentence)
    • Institutional: relies on the power of social institutions to enforce arguments (second sentence)
  • One judge's opinion:
    • The legal system relies on intellectual authority — in fact, courts are just "passive vehicles" for intellectual authority (last sentence)
  • Author's opinion: "especially interesting" (third sentence); "goes so far" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

• Paragraph note
  • View that law relies on institutional authority (and intellectual authority doesn't exist) and rebuttal (some institutional arguments don't last, some good arguments don't become institutional)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Some critics' view:
    • All intellectual authority doesn't really exist, as good arguments are really just the ones that institutions support (second sentence)
  • Author's rebuttal:
    • Some arguments supported by institutions don't stand the test of time, while some good arguments aren't accepted by institutions because they challenge institutional belief (third and last sentences)
  • Author's opinion: "can be countered that these claims break down" (third sentence); "Not all arguments ... stand the test of time" (third sentence); "some well-reasoned arguments never receive institutional imprimatur" (third sentence); "is common" (last sentence); "not the same thing" (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

• Paragraph note
  • Institutional authority view's rebuttal (intellectual authority is based on institutional standards; musical genius example)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Some critics' view:
    • What we think is intellectual authority is actually determined by institutional standards established through consensus (first sentence)
  • Example of institutional standards established through consensus, according to critics:
    • A supposed musical genius who hasn't been recognized over several decades shouldn't be automatically considered not a genius, as "several decades" is an arbitrary unit of time established by musicologists (second through last sentences)

Paragraph 4

• Paragraph note
  • Author's resolution (mostly institutional authority but use intellectual authority when revising precedent)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Author's view:
    • Legal systems primarily rely on institutional authority, but the ability to change past decisions when they realize that past cases were based on bad reasoning or outdated social mores allows it to exercise some intellectual authority (second and last sentences)
  • Definition of "precedent": judges decide a case a certain way because that's the way past cases have been decided (first sentence)
  • Author's attitude: "miss the crucial distinction" (second sentence), "thus played out ... leading one to draw the conclusion" (last sentence)

Main Point: Legal systems primarily rely on institutional authority, but the ability to change past decisions allows them to use intellectual authority as well.

Resolving a Debate Meta-Structure: This follows a Resolving a Debate Meta-Structure.* The debate is set up in the first paragraph: Do legal institutions rely on intellectual authority (where arguments are accepted because they're well-reasoned and virtuous) or institutional authority (where arguments are accepted because some institution tells us to accept them)? The first, second, and third paragraphs describe a back-and-forth between those who think intellectual authority defines the legal system and those who believe the legal system rests purely on institutional authority. The author finally resolves this debate in the fourth paragraph. The author claims that, while the legal system rests primarily on institutional authority, its ability to revise precedent when judges realize past cases were based on bad reasoning or outdated social mores allows it to exercise some intellectual authority.

In passages that employ a Resolving a Debate Meta-Structure, the main point is generally the author's mediation or reconciliation of the debate. Often, the author will summarize their mediation or reconciliation in a sentence or two. This author helpfully provides such a summary in the last sentence, so we can use that to answer the inevitable Main Point question.

*We could reasonably refer to this as a Question/Answer passage, as this passage is organized around an implicit question (Do legal systems rely on intellectual or institutional authority?). We could even refer to this as a Correcting the Record or Criticizing a Viewpoint passage since the author focuses on amending the view that the legal system only rests on institutional authority. Any of these Meta-Structures will help you describe the passage's main point and organization.