Reading comp PrepTest 141 · Section 1 · Question 27

Correct. Question Type:
Methods of Reasoning

Strategy Overview:
Review the relationship between the passages as we defined it, and then analyze the answers with that in mind

Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
We should always think about the relationship between the two passages after we've read through them, so let's remind ourselves of what we said when we thought that through:

If we take a step back and relate the passages, Passage B is a specific situation to which the principles in Passage A can be applied. Specifically, Passage B talks about land that was improperly taken from Native Americans, and thus the second and principles—the principles of transfer and rectification—would apply. Passage B makes room for compromise, considering the feasibility of such transfers. In speaking in principles, Passage A doesn't leave room for compromise.

So let's find an answer reflecting the general nature of Passage A and the application to a specific case of Passage B.

Answer Explanation:
(Lines 1-2; Lines 24-25; Line 48; Lines 57-58) This is a very tricky correct answer. The first half makes complete sense and lines up with our anticipated answer—Passage A is about presenting a more generalized view of the principles of justice in property. The second half is where it gets a bit trickier, and we definitely wouldn't have picked this answer until eliminating the other four. However, Passage B has a couple key phrases indicating that the Author is sketching out an argument that it does not necessarily endorse. First, it presents it as something that is "[o]ne natural way" of approaching the question, which "one might almost say" is obvious. This separates the Author from making these claims. And while calling it "obvious" and, later, ideal does suggest a more positive attitude, he also says that what he's calling for "may be impractical" with "compromises" possibly being required. By introducing the argument as something that one might say, and then undercutting it by stating that it might not be practical, we can support this answer saying that the Author of Passage B is putting forward an argument that he's not necessarily 100% behind.

Key Takeaway:
With these abstract answers, the LSAT will sometimes stretch the relationship between the correct answer and the stimulus a bit. However, it will never stretch it past the breaking point. Here, the correct answer didn't say that the Author of Passage B didn't necessarily agree with the argument he put forward—just that he didn't necessarily endorse it. Since he argued that "one" might argue for it, and that it "may be impractical," he very well may not fully endorse the argument he put forward, even if he used language such as "should" and "Ideally." Just think about this statement—"Ideally, we shouldn't have to go to war." That's almost certainly followed up with a, "But . . . we should probably have an army ready just in case."

Incorrect. (Lines 57-58) There are no competing views in Passage A, so we can rule this answer out based on the first half. Also, in saying that compromise might be necessary, Passage B arguably considers at least another view.

Incorrect. (Lines 1-2; Lines 36-39) Passage B arguably relies on the authority of the INA to support its claims. However, Passage A never establishes that the principles it invokes are commonly held. The Author clearly believes them, but there's no indication that that is the consensus view.

Incorrect. (Lines 56-57) Passage A lacks argumentative language—it speaks generally about what principles there are in the space of justice regarding property. Passage B puts forward arguments ("One natural way of reasoning"; "should be").

Incorrect. Similar to (D), Passage A lacks an argument. And there's no counterpoint to undermine in Passage B!