In recent years, a growing belief that the way society decides what to treat as true is controlled through largely unrecognized discursive practices has led legal reformers to examine the complex interconnections between narrative and law. ββ ββββ βββββ ββββββββ βββββ βββββββββ βββ βββββ ββ βββββββββ βββββββ βββββ βββββββ βββββββ ββββββ βββββββββ βββββ βββββββ ββββββ βββ ββββββ ββββ ββββββββ ββββ βββββββ ββ ββββ βββ ββββββ ββββββ ββ ββββββ βββ
Context Β·How do we decide what is true or false?
Legal systems use competing narratives about events; judges and juries assign "truth"
Implications of solution Β·Disruption of status quo, less advantage bestowed by legal training, emphasis on empathy
Passage Style
Critique or debate
Problem-analysis
15.
Which one of the following ββββββββββ βββββ βββββ βββββββββ ββ βββββ βββββββ βββββ ββ βββββββββββ βββ ββ ββββββββ ββββ βββ ββββββββ
Question Type
Implied
The correct answer will probably be supported by P1 or P2, which discuss legal systems based on objectivism.
a
In most Western ββββββββββ βββ βββββ βββββββββββββ ββββββββ ββββββ ββ ββββββββ ββ βββββ ββββββββββ
Not supported, because we have no evidence of who controls access to training. Itβs easy to assume that the legal establishment controls access to legal training, but thatβs just not something we have evidence of from the passage.
b
Expertise in legal βββββββββ βββββββ βββββ ββ ββββ βββββββ ββββββββββ
Supported, because we know that the author thinks personal narrative can βcreate a sense of empathy between legal insiders and people traditionally excluded from legal discourse, and hence, power.β By saying, βand hence, power,β we know the author thinks exclusion from legal discourse excludes one from power. In addition, the author also indicates that the legal scholars seek βempowermentβ of people who arenβt fluent in law.
c
Legal discourse has ββββββ βββββββββββββ ββββ ββββββββ βββ ββββ ββββββββββ
Not supported, because although we know that legal discourse is traditionally abstract, we donβt know that it has become βprogressively more abstractβ over centuries.
Anti-supported, because traditional legal discourse assumes the existence of neutral, objective observers.
e
Traditional legal discourse βββββ ββ βββββββββ βββββββββ βββββ ββββββ
Not supported. We have no evidence traditional legal discourse wants to help resolve or bring together different world views. In fact, it assumes that thereβs only one neutral description that is βprivilegedβ over all other views. Rather than reconciling other views, traditional legal discourse arguably rejects other views.
Difficulty
81% of people who answer get this correct
This is a moderately difficult question.
It is similar in difficulty to other questions in this passage.
CURVE
Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right
25%138
150
75%161
Analysis
Implied
Critique or debate
Law
Problem-analysis
Answer Popularity
PopularityAvg. score
a
9%
161
b
81%
167
c
3%
161
d
2%
157
e
5%
163
Question history
You don't have any history with this question.. yet!
You've discovered a premium feature!
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 belowβit only takes a minuteβand 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 belowβit only takes a minuteβand then youβre 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 belowβit only takes a minuteβand then youβre free to vote on this!
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.