PrepTest 145

[lcid:3678] Prep Test 145 LSAT — Reading Comp — S3 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 1-6  .        The Universal Declaration of Human Rights  . (UDHR), approved by the United Nations General  . Assembly Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Legal


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • History of UDHR (first treaty on human rights, some wanted to create an obligation to act)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Comparisons, according to the author:
      • Unlike other international treaties, the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was expressly affirmed and created a standard for human rights (first and second sentences)
      • Some small countries and NGOs wanted the language of UDHR to go further and create an obligation to promote human rights, but the version of UDHR that passed didn't feature such an obligation (third through last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "lobbied vigorously" (fourth sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Process and content of UDHR (long drafting/debate process, expressed principles of freedom/equality and fundamental rights)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Examples of fundamental rights asserted in UDHR, according to the author:
      • The right to work, the right to rest and leisure, and the right to education (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "elaborate" (second sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Author on what UDHR gets wrong (nonbinding) and right (led to binding conventions and set standards/aspirations)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • The biggest weakness of the UDHR is that it's a nonbinding legal document (first and second sentences)
      • But the UDHR is a progressive document that has created (belatedly) legally binding human rights and sent a good message (last sentence)
    • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to the author:
      • The UDHR has caused the creation of legally binding human rights agreements (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "in many ways a progressive document" (first sentence); "weaknesses" (first sentence); "most regrettable" (first sentence); "purely programmatic nature" (second sentence); "has led, even if belatedly" (last sentence); "clearly deserves recognition" (last sentence)

Main Point: Despite its nonbinding legal status and late adoption, the UDHR is a good first step in promoting and starting to set a legal framework for international human rights laws.

Meta-Structure?

Importance of [Subject]: This passage best fits the Importance of [Subject] Meta-Structure. In such a passage, the author describes why a particular person, artistic work, law or legal accomplishment, or scientific breakthrough was historically significant or meaningful. The word "[Subject]" is just a placeholder for whatever specific topic the passage is about. In this case, the passage is about an international treaty, so we can think of this as an Importance of Treaty passage.

In an Importance of [Subject] passage, the main point is generally the author's opinions on why the subject was important. The author summarizes their opinions on the UDHR treaty in the last paragraph, so we'll use that to construct our anticipated main point.

Last Thoughts?

Note how the last paragraph presents the strengths and weaknesses of the UDHR, yet our anticipated main point makes it seem as if the author has a positive view of it. That's because of how the last paragraph is phrased, with the author pointing out a flaw but then pivoting ("Nevertheless") to the positive. In pivoting away from the negative to the positive, we should view the author's opinion as leaning more towards the latter while still believing the former.

Question prompt

The author would be Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: E

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Legal

Strategy Overview

Review the main point, and use notes or highlighted/underlined text in the passage to recall the author’s attitude, and find the answer that best reflects your understanding of the main point/author’s attitude

Answer Anticipation

This question asks us about the author's view, but doesn't provide any insight into the topic of the correct answer or where the supporting information might show up in the passage. This means the correct answer is likely to relate back to the author's main point. As such, we'll need to rely on our big-picture understanding of the passage to answer this question. We should start by reminding ourselves of the main point (either by reviewing what we said after reading the passage or by re-reading our answer to the main point question). We can also review any notes about the author's attitude or any text we highlighted because it expresses the author's opinion. After doing that, we can head to the answer choices, tabling those that don't line up with the main point. For those answer choices that conform to the author’s main point, we'll use our notes and the passage to see if they’re correct.

Answer choices

  1. A
    The human rights language Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Is this consistent with the author's main point or what we noted about the author's argument?

    No, this isn't consistent with the author's main point or reflected in our notes. In fact, the only notes we have on the author's opinion on no the UDHR — not Article 1 of the UN Charter (a different document). Therefore, we can eliminate (A) without checking the passage.

    Besides, we wouldn't find any support for this answer choice even if we re-read the entire passage. Although the author says some countries and NGOs felt like Article 1 didn’t go far enough in protecting human rights (P1, S3), the author doesn’t say or imply they are correct. And even if the author agreed with these countries and NGOs, that still wouldn't prove that Article 1 is "almost wholly ineffectual."

  2. B
    The weaknesses of the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Is this consistent with the author's main point or what we noted about the author's argument?

    No, this contradicts the author's main point. Note how the last paragraph presents the strengths and weaknesses of the UDHR, but the author points out a flaw before then pivoting ("Nevertheless") to the positive. In pivoting away from the negative to the positive, we can infer that the author's opinion leans more positive than negative. That was reflected in our anticipated main point, allowing us to eliminate (B).

  3. C
    It was relatively easy Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Is this consistent with the author's main point or what we noted about the author's argument?

    Nope. This contradicts our note for the second paragraph ("long drafting/debate process"), so we can eliminate (C) without checking the passage. After all, in the section discussing the process by which the UDHR was passed, the author talks about the passionate arguments and diverse groups that needed to be brought together during negotiations (P2, S2-S3). If anything, that shows that it was difficult to reach a consensus!

  4. D
    The drafters of the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Is this consistent with the author's main point or what we noted about the author's argument?

    No, this isn't consistent with the author's main point or reflected in our notes. Neither suggests that the author argued that there should be more rights granted in the UDHR. Therefore, we can eliminate (D) without checking the passage.

    Besides, we wouldn't find any support for this answer choice even if we re-read the entire passage. The passage does note that the UDHR "asserted a number of fundamental rights" (P2, S5), which isn’t the same as saying that it protects all such rights. However, it’s also not the same as saying that it left any out, and when discussing its weaknesses, the author notes only that it's nonbinding (P3, S1), not that it isn’t comprehensive. So, ultimately, this answer doesn’t have textual support.

  5. E
    The Universal Declaration of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem

    (E) Is this consistent with the author's main point or what we noted about the author's argument?

    Yes! This is consistent with our note for the third paragraph ("what UDHR gets wrong (nonbinding)"). So, we can confidently select (E). After all, the Author notes that the “most regrettable” shortcoming of the UDHR is that it’s not legally binding (P3, S1), so the author would agree that it would be more aligned with its “staunchest proponents” if it didn’t have that weakness.

What this tests

Discussion

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.

View all discussions Start a discussion