Logical reasoning PrepTest 149 · Section 4 · Question 19

Incorrect. Since there's no precedent, the second principle applies. However, the judge's views do contradict widespread public opinion, which, according to that principle, means he shouldn't use his own legal views (see the contrapositive). Since he does, this answer choice contradicts the principle.

Incorrect. Since there's no precedent, the second principle applies. However, the judge's views do contradict widespread public opinion, which, according to the principle, means he should not use his own legal views. Since he does, this answer choice contradicts the principle. It's also essentially the same as answer choice (A).

Incorrect. The real answer choice here starts once we get to Judge Wilson, who is operating under a precedent, so the first principle applies. However, there are two issues here. First, this answer talks about Judge Wilson's belief about whether the precedent opposes the basic moral values of society, whereas the principle is about whether the precedent actually opposes it. Second, even ignoring that, the principle establishes that a ruling not contrary to those views should be followed, so Wilson violates that in following his own legal views instead of the precedent.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True (Principle)

Stimulus Summary:

(1) Precedent exists: not Precedent contrary to basic moral values → Future judges follow precedent
(2) No precedent exists: Judges views don't contradict widespread public opinion ←→ Use own legal views

Answer Anticipation:
Here, the stimulus here provides two principles, one that applies when there is a precedent, and another that applies when there isn't one. Getting these conditionals correct and noting important details both in the principles and in the answer choices is going to be key to getting this question correct.

While the first conditional is more straightforward, the second is more complex—it has two indicator words ("when" and "only then"). Since one is a sufficient condition indicator and the other a necessary condition indicator, the pair establishes this rule as a biconditional. That's key, since it allows for an answer choice that would otherwise be ruled out as an illegal reversal of the principle.

With these two conditionals diagrammed, we should take the contrapositives and move to the answers (though we're not expecting the contrapositive of #1 to come into play because of how it's structured):

(1) not Future judges follow ruling → Ruling contrary to basic moral values
(2) Judges views do contradict widespread public opinion ←→ not Use own legal views

Answer Explanation:
Since there's no precedent, the second principle applies. Without a widespread public opinion on the issue, the Judge's views can't contradict it, so Judge Watanabe is allowed to follow her own legal views on the subject according to the principle. This answer conforms to the second principle, so it's the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Must Be True (Principle) questions are all about getting the conditional diagrams right and making sure that you're paying attention to the details in the answer choices. Slow yourself down and make sure you have a working diagram of the principles—it'll speed you up in the answer choices!

Incorrect. Since there is a precedent in this situation, the first principle applies. And since the precedents conform to the basic moral values of society, that principle establishes they should be followed. Since Jude Balila doesn't follow the precedent, instead basing her ruling on her own views, she doesn't conform to the principle.