Reading comp PrepTest 147 · Section 3 · Question 10
Passage
Questions 7-13 . The government of Mali passed a law against . excavating and exporting the wonderful terra-cotta . sculptures
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Legal Studies
Paragraph 1
Simply passing laws or doctrines to protect cultural artifacts can ironically result in people illegally excavating/exporting them while hiding important information about them, so there need to be other possible solutions that allow for "better" outcomes, even if they're not the "best" outcomes.
Key Lines:
Lines 6-12 - The problem is outlined
Lines 18-20 - A doctrine to address the problem is described
Lines 22-25 - Laws building from the doctrine are discussed
Lines 30-34 - A paradox ("painful irony") about implementing the doctrine or laws is highlighted
Lines 51-56 - The Author implies a non-ideal but practical solution addressing the paradox
Meta-Structure:
Problem/Solution - Here, the Author notes a problem—cultural knowledge is lost when cultural artifacts are illicitly looted and exported from their country of origin. One solution—doctrines/laws making this illegal—can ironically result in the information being hidden and thus still lost. And while she does note an ideal solution—professional archaeologists doing the excavations—she recognizes that this isn't practical/realistic.
Rather, she imagines a solution whereby the government steps in to record, register, and tax these cultural items as they're excavated and exported by individuals. While not as good as the archaeologists, she notes it's better than them being looted and that knowledge lost forever.
Last Thoughts:
This is a tricky passage! The last paragraph, in particular, highlights a middle-of-the-road approach phrased in a convoluted manner. Making sure that you understood the comparison between the potential solutions will probably be key to answering questions.
Also, note that ironies and paradoxes can, more or less, be treated as the same thing on the LSAT. So when an RC passage notes an irony, think of it as a paradox—and we know paradoxes are important!
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- A situation is described which implies a problem
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Mali/Djenne-jeno sculptures - Mali couldn't enforce law against excavation/export of sculptures, so people did so illegally
- Author - These collectors "rightly" admired them
- Problem - A lot of important info is now lost
- Paragraph note
- A relevant doctrine is described
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- UNESCO Doctrine - Cultural artifacts belong to the culture
- Some countries have gone further - These artifacts are state property
- Paragraph note
- The doctrine is applied to the situation, and a paradox is noted
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Mali's government should have been in control
- Irony/paradox - These regulations can result in people keeping things secret to get around them, making problem worse
- Paragraph note
- A thought experiment is done to "rank" different outcomes and suggest one
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Suppose - UNESCO helped Mali to educate, register artifacts, and tax their export
- Worst - What did happen (illicit excavation export)
- Better - Supposed situation, where people are excavating and exporting things under some regulations
- Best* - Professional archaeologists did the excavation
Simply passing laws or doctrines to protect cultural artifacts can ironically result in people illegally excavating/exporting them while hiding important information about them, so there need to be other possible solutions that allow for "better" outcomes, even if they're not the "best" outcomes.
Key Lines:
Lines 6-12 - The problem is outlined
Lines 18-20 - A doctrine to address the problem is described
Lines 22-25 - Laws building from the doctrine are discussed
Lines 30-34 - A paradox ("painful irony") about implementing the doctrine or laws is highlighted
Lines 51-56 - The Author implies a non-ideal but practical solution addressing the paradox
Meta-Structure:
Problem/Solution - Here, the Author notes a problem—cultural knowledge is lost when cultural artifacts are illicitly looted and exported from their country of origin. One solution—doctrines/laws making this illegal—can ironically result in the information being hidden and thus still lost. And while she does note an ideal solution—professional archaeologists doing the excavations—she recognizes that this isn't practical/realistic.
Rather, she imagines a solution whereby the government steps in to record, register, and tax these cultural items as they're excavated and exported by individuals. While not as good as the archaeologists, she notes it's better than them being looted and that knowledge lost forever.
Last Thoughts:
This is a tricky passage! The last paragraph, in particular, highlights a middle-of-the-road approach phrased in a convoluted manner. Making sure that you understood the comparison between the potential solutions will probably be key to answering questions.
Also, note that ironies and paradoxes can, more or less, be treated as the same thing on the LSAT. So when an RC passage notes an irony, think of it as a paradox—and we know paradoxes are important!
Question prompt
The author of the
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: A
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Legal
Answer choices
-
AIt can play an Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A matches the stem
Correct. Question Type:
Must Be True
Strategy Overview:
Review the Author's opinion on UNESCO
Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
Here's a tip for this question—it's super easy to identify where UNESCO is discussed because it's in all caps! So let's work through the passage, using our notes to focus on sections where UNESCO is discussed and the Author's opinion is noted.
Paragraph 2 is the first place where UNESCO shows up. There, their role in preserving artifacts and the doctrine they built up is described. The answer might reflect this description, but it's more likely to reflect the Author's opinion.
Paragraph 3 also mentions UNESCO, and there it does show the Author's attitude. In that paragraph, the Author notes that the UNESCO doctrine/regulations have a "painful irony"—they can end up frustrating the goal of preserving information about historical artifacts by driving people who own them underground (Lines 30-34). There's one potential answer.
Finally, Paragraph 4 brings UNESCO up. In that paragraph, the Author discusses how Mali could have implemented a regulatory system that would address the problem in a more realistic manner. Interestingly there, after criticizing the UNESCO doctrine, the Author highlights that UNESCO could have helped Mali with this alternative system ("helped by UNESCO"; Line 42). So the Author does believe that UNESCO could help in these situations.
Since we have two opinions from the Author on UNESCO, one positive and one negative, we should stay flexible in the answers. This (sadly) means we can't make eliminations based on the first few words just being positive or negative, so let's get to the answers ASAP.
Answer Explanation:
(Lines 41-47) When exploring an alternative means of preserving cultural artifacts and knowledge other than a blanket ban and state ownership, the Author notes that UNESCO could have helped Mali implement it. As such, she must believe that UNESCO can play a role in minimizing abuses, making this the correct answer.
Key Takeaway:
Usually, when a question asks about the Author's opinion on a topic, you can get a general idea of positive/negative/neutral to help you with an initial consideration of each answer. When that's not the case, be sure that you leave yourself plenty of time to analyze the answers! -
BIts stance on cultural Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 13-17) The UNESCO doctrine is tied to a recognition that "such pillaging" is condemnable (Line 13), so we can't say that the Mali situation in particular led to the doctrine being developed. It sounds as if it's just one example of many, so this answer that it's the "most" important situation leading to the doctrine can't be supported. -
CIt is more effective Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 41-47) The only time that the passage discusses UNESCO getting involved in a particular case is in the hypothetical in Paragraph 4. As such, the passage doesn't compare the effectiveness of it in different situations. -
DIt pays too little Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. (Paragraph 2) If anything, Paragraph 2 suggests that UNESCO was responsive to the needs of countries such as Mali. Just because the Author believes that their doctrine isn't effective doesn't mean that they weren't paying attention to a need. -
EIts effectiveness in limiting Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. (Lines 4-5) The passage discusses Mali's lack of ability to fund archaeological excavations, not UNESCO's lack of funding.
What this tests
Question analytics
Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.
Answer choice distribution
Accounts
Save your place across PrepTests
Bookmark questions, build weak-spot lists, and pick up exactly where you left off—built for serious repeat practice.
No payment yet. We will only email when accounts open.
Already have an account? Log in
Deeper help
Ask follow-ups on any step
Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.
Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.
Discussion
-
What is wrong with E? 3 replies
Started by LillCarr
-
explanation 1 reply
Started by Madelyn-Luskey