Kevin's explanation for why answer choice "C" is incorrect is excellent. Answer choice "E" felt clunky, but it definitely embodied what the reference to the Fur Seal Treaty "primarily served" best.
Since the reference to the Fur Seal Treaty of 1910 doesn't make any mention of traditional handicrafts, wouldn't it be more true that answer choice E is correct if the question stem was asking for the purpose of referencing the MMPA in 1972?
That's why I didn't choose E. I wanted to, but I didn't due to the reason above. I chose C because it seemed like the next most logical answer, though it wasn't perfect either.
I agree. About C, I think maybe we should think about the paragraph too, to me, it seems like its purpose is to discuss the evolution of rights, with each "date" mentioned explaining a part of this evolution, so rather than just demonstrating the existance of a legal precedent, the reason for the fur treaty to be there is primarily to give this context. Do you think this is correct?
I did the same thing, but I think E is probably right because it emphasizes the word "evolution" of rights. The introduction of the Fur Seal Treaty allows us to see how the rights changed or evolved over time. Without mention of the Treaty, we wouldn't have any change happening. C still feels very tempting to me but we don't know how"well-known" the precedent really is and it is mainly geared towards sea otters rather than the generalized "protected animals" that the answer gives us.
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
17 comments
I feel like the sentence after it about the MMPA is more aligned with answer E?
Chose C with so much confidence its astounding
@jessicapearson same
Kevin's explanation for why answer choice "C" is incorrect is excellent. Answer choice "E" felt clunky, but it definitely embodied what the reference to the Fur Seal Treaty "primarily served" best.
perhaps being a lawyer isn't for me
@TheBigFatPanda I agree. Pack it up now little bro.
oh!
THIS IS SUCH BULLSHIT C IS SO RIGHT
Isn't C also wrong because it specifies animals but the law was only about one animal? It would lose accuracy points.
@cbrianne1570 Definitely!
@cbrianne1570 the law is named after the fur seal, but also said to cover otters. We can very reasonably infer it covers at least two species.
I initially chose C too, but see how E is more relevant, since the paragraph is leading up to a description of the court cases.
Sometimes I feel like I should have gotten an answer right if only I had the chance to argue my answer's case in front of a jury...
Since the reference to the Fur Seal Treaty of 1910 doesn't make any mention of traditional handicrafts, wouldn't it be more true that answer choice E is correct if the question stem was asking for the purpose of referencing the MMPA in 1972?
That's why I didn't choose E. I wanted to, but I didn't due to the reason above. I chose C because it seemed like the next most logical answer, though it wasn't perfect either.
I agree. About C, I think maybe we should think about the paragraph too, to me, it seems like its purpose is to discuss the evolution of rights, with each "date" mentioned explaining a part of this evolution, so rather than just demonstrating the existance of a legal precedent, the reason for the fur treaty to be there is primarily to give this context. Do you think this is correct?
I did the same thing, but I think E is probably right because it emphasizes the word "evolution" of rights. The introduction of the Fur Seal Treaty allows us to see how the rights changed or evolved over time. Without mention of the Treaty, we wouldn't have any change happening. C still feels very tempting to me but we don't know how"well-known" the precedent really is and it is mainly geared towards sea otters rather than the generalized "protected animals" that the answer gives us.
This was my reading as well