LSAT 127 – Section 2 – Question 22

LSAT 127 - Section 2 - Question 22

December 2003

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 1:21

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT127 S2 Q22
+LR
Resolve reconcile or explain +RRE
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
7%
160
B
5%
156
C
74%
166
D
3%
154
E
10%
159
147
155
163
 +Harder 146.61 +SubsectionMedium

The writing styles in works of high literary quality are not well suited to the avoidance of misinterpretation. For this reason, the writing in judicial decisions, which are primarily intended as determinations of law, is rarely of high literary quality. However, it is not uncommon to find writing of high literary quality in dissenting opinions, which are sometimes included in written decisions in cases heard by a panel of judges.

"Surprising" Phenomenon
Judicial decisions are rarely of high literary quality, yet dissenting opinions occasionally are of high literary quality.

Objective
The right answer will be a hypothesis that explains why dissenting opinions are written in a different way than are judicial decisions. High literary quality can lead to misinterpretations, so it makes sense why judicial decisions aren’t written that way. We need to know why dissenters sometimes write opinions of high literary quality despite the chance their words are misinterpreted.

A
It is not uncommon for more than one judge to have an influence on the way a dissenting opinion is written.
Are dissenting opinions influenced by multiple judges more likely to be of high literary quality? Who knows. This doesn’t tell us.
B
Unlike literary works, legal opinions rely heavily on the use of technical terminology.
This doesn’t resolve the discrepancy between judicial decisions and dissenting opinions. We need to know why the latter are sometimes of high literary quality.
C
The law is not to any great extent determined by dissenting opinions.
Since the law isn’t determined by dissenting opinions, authors of such opinions aren’t concerned about misinterpretation. They’re free to write however they like, which sometimes leads to high literary quality.
D
Judges spend much more time reading judicial decisions than reading works of high literary quality.
This doesn’t explain why dissenting opinions are sometimes of high literary quality. We don’t care what the judges usually read.
E
Judicial decisions issued by panels of judges are likely to be more widely read than are judicial decisions issued by a single judge who hears a case alone.
We’re interested in why dissenting opinions are sometimes of high literary quality. How widely-read judicial decisions are doesn’t clear anything up, since we don’t know the affect that being widely-read has on a judicial decision.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 127 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply