Self-study
P1
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
P2
██ █████████ ████ ███████ ████████ ████ ████████ █████████ ████████ ██████████████ ████ ██ ███████████ ██████████████ ████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ ████████ ████████ ████ ████████████ █████████ ████ ███ ██████ █████████████ ██ ███████ ██ █████████████ ██████████ ███
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.
P3
████ ███ ███████ █████ ████████ ████████████ █████████ ██ ████ ██████████ ██ ████ ███████ ██ █████████████ ██████████ ███ ████████ ██ █ ████████████ ████ ██ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ███████ ██████ ████ █████ ███████ ████████ ███ ███ ██████ ███████ ███ ███████████ ███ ███ ██ ███ ████████████ ██ ████████ ███ █ ███████ ███ ███████ █████ ███ ████ ██████ █ ████████ ██ █ ████ ██ ███████████████ █████████████ ██ █████████████ ██████ ████ ██ ████████████ ██████████ █████ ███ ███████ █████ ████ █████ █ ██████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ████████ ██ █████ ██ █████ ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ████████ ██████ ███ ███ ████ ████ ████ █████████████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ██████ ██ █████████████ ██ ██████ ████ ████████████ ██ ███ █████
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.
P4
███ █████████ █████ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ █████ █ ███████ ██████ ████████ █ ████ █ ███████ ███ ████████ █ █████ ███ ████████ █████ █████ ███ ████ ███████ ████ ███████ ██ █████████████ ██████████ ███
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
10.
That some arguments "
Question Type
Meaning in context (of word, phrase, or idea)
Structure
We need to read before and after the referenced text to get a better sense of its meaning. The author explains that some well-reasoned, intellectual arguments “never receive institutional imprimatur.” He argues that this shows that intellectual authority and institutional consensus
a
fail to gain █████████████ █████████
In P2, the author says that intellectual authority and institutional consensus are not the same thing. As evidence, he points out that some well-reasoned, intellectual arguments “never receive institutional imprimatur.” In other words, some arguments never receive institutional consensus or institutional support, even though they’re intellectual.
b
fail to challenge █████████████ ███████
Actually, the author argues that intellectual arguments that “never receive institutional imprimatur” often do
c
fail to conform ██ ███ ███████ ██ █████████
The author doesn’t mention precedent until P4, where he explains that it can give legal systems both institutional and intellectual authority. In P2, he’s arguing that institutional and intellectual authority are not the same thing, since some intellectual arguments never receive institutional consensus.
d
fail to convince ██ ██████ ██ ████ █████████
The author is actually arguing that, even though some intellectual arguments are well-reasoned, they still don’t receive “institutional imprimatur,” or institutional consensus. This is not necessarily because the arguments are unconvincing; it might be because they “challenge institutional beliefs.”
e
fail to gain ██████████ ██████ ██ ████████
P1 explains that institutional authority can depend on coercion, while intellectual authority is founded on good reasoning. In P2, the author explains that some well-reasoned, intellectual arguments don’t receive institutional consensus, suggesting that intellectual and institutional authority are distinct from one another. He never claims that these well-reasoned arguments rely on coercion.