PrepTest 114 - Section 3 - Passage 2 - Question 14

Hide analysis

Intellectual authority is defined as the authority of arguments that prevail by virtue of good reasoning and do not depend on coercion or convention. █ ███████████ ███████ █████████████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ██████ ████████████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ████ ███ ██ ███ ███ ███████ ████████████ ██████████ ███

Intro to Concepts · Intellectual v. Institutional Authority

Intellectual authority is founded on good reasoning whereas institutional authority is founded on the coercive power of social institutions.

███ █████████ ███████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ ██████████ ███████████ ███████ ████ ███████ ███ ████████████ ████ ███████████ ██████ ██ █ ██████ ████████████ ██████████ ███

Question · Is the authority wielded by the courts institutional or intellectual?

███ █████ ████ ██ ███ ██ ██ █████ ████ ██████ ███ ██████ ███████ ████████ ███ ████████ ███ ████████████ █████████ ██ ███ ███ ███ ███████ ██ ████████ ██████ ██ █████ ████

One Judge · claims courts have purely intellectual authority

Critics · claim courts have purely institutional authority

Some even say that intellectual authority doesn't exist.

Author’s Critique of Critics · Intellectual authority is real and different from institutional authority

Support: Some arguments accepted by institutions are later rejected on intellectual grounds; some arguments rejected by institutions are later recognized on intellectual grounds.

████ ███ ███████ █████ ████████ ████████████ █████████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██ ████ ███████ ██ █████████████ ██████████ ███ ████████ ██ █ ████████████ ████ ██ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ███████ ██████ ████ █████ ███████ ████████ ███ ███ ██████ ███████ ███ ███████████ ███ ███ ██ ███ ████████████ ██ ████████ ███ █ ███████ ███ ███████ █████ ███ ████ ██████ █ ████████ ██ █ ████ ██ ███████████████ █████████████ ██ █████████████ ██████ ████ ██ ████████████ ██████████ █████ ███ ███████ █████ ████ █████ █ ██████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ████████ ██ █████ ██ █████ ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ████████ ██████ ███ ███ ████ ████ ████ █████████████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ██████ ██ █████████████ ██ ██████ ████ ████████████ ██ ███ █████

Critics' Rebuttal to Author · Intellectual authority depends on institutional recognition

E.g., if a composer lingered in obscurity for 20 years and is hence judged to not be a genius, is that an intellectual or institutional judgment? You might say it's intellectual, i.e., a judgment on the merits, i.e., he's just a bad composer. But critics might say, hold on, how do you know 20 years is long enough to recognize merit or lack thereof? Why not 30 years or 70? The length of time is purely an institutional convention. Hence, even what seems like an intellectual judgment is actually an institutional one.

Critics' Rebuttal · Legal precedent is example of institutional authority

Judges decide cases based on how similar cases were previously decided.

Author’s Critique · Intellectual authority enables judges to reconsider, revise, or overrule precedent

Author's Main Point · Even if most of legal power is institutional, there is a significant amount of intellectual power as well.

Passage Style

Critique or debate

14.

Based on the passage, the ██████ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ █████ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████

Question Type

Author’s perspective

Implied

This asks us about the author’s perspective on precedent. Recall that the critics think that precedent is an example of purely institutional authority, while the author thinks that it can allow for intellectual authority, since judges can reconsider, revise, or overrule badly reasoned decisions.

It is the ████ ████ ██████ ██████ ███ ██ ████ ████ ██ ███████ █ ██████ ████████████ ██████████

Unsupported— too strong. The author never claims that precedent allows judges to achieve a purely intellectual authority. In fact, he admits that most of the power of legal systems may be institutional; he just argues that precedent still allows for some intellectual authority, since judges can reconsider past decisions. He also never claims that precedent is the only tool that allows judges to practice intellectual authority.

It is a ██████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ██ ████████ ██ ██████████ █████████ ████ ███ ███████ ██ ████████████ ██████████

Unsupported. Precedent can conflict with the demands of intellectual authority, if judges never reconsider decisions. But precedent can also allow for intellectual authority, since judges can reconsider past decisions.

It is a ██████ ████ ███ █████ ████████████ █████████ ██████ ██ ██ ████████ ████ ███ █████████████ ██ ██████████

Supported. Precedent is a useful tool, but its intellectual authority comes from judges’ ability to reconsider badly reasoned decisions. If judges do not reconsider decisions, then precedent lacks intellectual authority.

81%

It is often ██ ██████████ ████ ███████ ██ ████████ ██████ ████ █████████████ ███ ████████████ █████████ ██ ████ ██████████

Anti-supported. The author thinks that the doctrine of precedent does allow judges to reconsider badly reasoned past decisions. He also never suggests that precedent is unreliable.

It is an ██████████ ████ ████ ██████ ██ █████████ ███████ ██ █████ ████████████ ██████████

Anti-supported. The author thinks that legal precedent does allow for intellectual authority, since judges can reconsider past decisions. He never suggests that precedent is unreliable or that it should be abandoned.

PrepTest 114 - Section 3 - Passage 2 - Question 14

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action