Q13

[jayparkcom]

why isn't it D?
I thought he thought Hart's work was incomplete.

[demetri.blaisdell]

This question is asking what the author thinks of Hart, not what Dworkin thinks of him. The author gives us some clues as to what she thinks of Hart in a few places:

Lines 8-11: Hart is "still the most persuasive statement" of these two theories of the law.

Lines 46-47: But it "would be a mistake" to dispute Hart's theories because of Dworkin's criticisms alone (there may be criticisms, but Dworkin's are bad).

Lines 53-57: The author tries to update Hart by saying that "most interesting and controversial cases" come down to a penumbra (sort of a mixture) of rules and principles (most cases but maybe not all).

From all of this, I can infer that the author still thinks Hart's theory is worthy of respect, even if there could be some problems in a few cases or there could be other criticisms. (B) tells us that.

Wrong answers:

(A) has a degree problem. Sure, the author still respects Hart. But she implies that there could be legitimate criticisms of his work and that, while most interesting cases can be described using an adaptation of his framework, perhaps some cases can not.

(C) doesn't give us the respect the author has for Hart.

(D) has the problem of using the word "unwieldy." The problem with Hart is that he oversimplified the law. Lines 30-31 show us that the criticism of Hart is he makes things binary where the law is actually much richer. So if anything, Hart's theory is too easy to use (it doesn't match the complexity that actually exists).

(E) again misses the respect the author has for Hart. How can it be outmoded but "still the clearest and most persuasive statement of these theories."

I hope this helps. Let me know if you have any questions.

Demetri