Q22

[jasonleb1]

I can see how B is correct, but I don't see what's wrong with C (which I wound up choosing between the two).

Any clarification would be appreciated, thanks.

[samuel.harris.10]

I chose C too. But when reviewing realized that it's description of passage B is off the mark. The situation it describes does not exemplify a moral ideal.

[ohthatpatrick]

Since I haven't yet seen these answer choices, I'll share with you my pre-phrase for them.

Psg A was written for the purpose of juxtaposing the IDEAL of property justice with the REAL of property injustice and suggesting a method of closing that gap.

Psg B was written for the purpose of describing the origins/intent of a law and suggesting how it be interpreted nowadays.

(A) 1st half seems doable. 2nd half makes no sense. Did psg B criticize any proposed solutions?

(B) "to sketch" seems too neutral. Psg A gets beyond outlining and starts making normative suggestions. There's no specific case examined in Psg B.

(C) again, I don't love Psg A being so neutral. This doesn't encompass the last paragraph of Psg A. Is there a case in Psg B?

(D) 1st half seems doable. Psg A seems to argue for property justice. Does psg B even mention a moral theory, let alone question its assumptions?

(E) 1st half is alright match for last paragraph of A. For B, is the Nonintercourse Act a counterexample to a moral principle?

Yikes. I'd eliminate all five.

Were there any here that were "true, just not good enough" to me?

Since I was primarily reacting to the 1st half and bailing if I didn't like it, let me see which ones are legit for Psg B.

(A) criticize proposed solution? totally off

(B) Give a moral analysis. Love it. "of a real case"? I thought there was no real case. Maybe they don't mean case, as in case law. Maybe they just mean the generic "she's got a real case of the Mondays." In terms of contrasting with psg A, it's true that A is totally hypothetical whereas B involves some reality. Maybe I could make peace with that.

(C) I don't know that the Nonintercourse Act exemplifies any moral ideal. Plus, the 2nd paragraph of B sounds very author-opinion based, so I prefer (B)'s phrasing.

(D) question assumptions? totally off

(E) provide a counterexample? totally off

So for psg B, it's gotta be (B) or (C), but I prefer (B).

Let's verify the 1st half of (B). Hmm, it's definitely TRUE. I just thought it was incomplete (I'm finding on modern LSAT RC that "true, though incomplete" is becoming more and more of a thing on correct answers).

I thought that the whole last paragraph of psg A was left out of (B), but I guess we could throw Rectification of Injustice into that 'branch of moral theory'. It IS described as a principle.

Fine, (B) is the correct answer.

[blahsheep]

I originally chose (C), but looking back on it, I now see two issues with how it characterizes Passage A.

1. I don't think it "spells out the details" of fundamental principles. Rather, it's a more general view of moral principles and never really goes into the specifics. That seems more in line with (B) of it only sketching a "general outline."

2. (C) is even more incomplete because it says "two fundamental principles." However, Passage A devotes an entire paragraph to a third principle, the rectification of injustice. We could argue that (B) is general, but "branch of moral theory" can encompass all three principles of property (acquisition, transfer, and rectification). I think (C) is a bit too specific (two principles) to be correct, while (B) is general enough to work.

[JennaL126]

I'm still a little confused about why B is a better answer than C. I thought the phrase "exhaustively cover the subject of justice regarding property" followed by a detailed definition in Passage A was contradictory to the concept of a general outline. In addition, could the case mentioned in C refer to the general case of land illicitly taken away from Native Americans and how to deal with it? With this exemplifying the moral ideal in the second paragraph that "land should be restored to its rightful owners"? Would a "case" ever refer to a more general subject like this, or is it limited to things like legislation, specific incidents and people, etc. Any help would be greatly appreciated, I've struggled to understand this question for a while!