- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:00 am
#23766
Complete Question Explanation
Must Be True. The correct answer choice is (E)
The stimulus observes that legal rules involve general classifications and consequences. The stimulus then explains that applying a rule to a case involves deciding whether the case falls into the appropriate categories. The stimulus finalizes the explanation by stating that decisions establish legal effects rather than matters of fact.
The stimulus can be very confusing, because it involves disassociating fact from legal decisions. The best solution in a situation such as this is to reference the question, which asks you what must be true. That means that it is more important that you can match the choices against the stimulus than that you grasp every concept in the stimulus, so you should just go to the choices.
Answer choice (A): Since the stimulus draws a distinction between legal rules and matters of fact, you should not choose a response that concerns a similarity between those. This choice is wrong.
Answer choice (B): Once again, the stimulus draws a distinction rather than a similarity between legal rules and matters of fact, so this choice is wrong. Remember, the stimulus does not offer any rules about “matters of fact.”
Answer choice (C): This attractive choice is nevertheless incorrect. Making a legal decision does involve matters of fact, because it involves judging whether the facts of the case fall in the appropriate categories to invoke a legal rule. The decision itself does not establish fact, but the decision utilizes fact.
Answer choice (D): This choice is wrong, because you should not assume that the rule can decide for itself whether it applies. A judge or some other person must decide, even if the rule provides the relevant instructions.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice. When the facts of the case fall into a category, they invoke a rule, but using a rule is equivalent to a legal effect rather than a matter of fact. That means that invoking a rule is not a matter of fact. That does not have to make sense, because a must be true question is about whether the stimulus forces the response, not whether the response makes sense in reality.
Must Be True. The correct answer choice is (E)
The stimulus observes that legal rules involve general classifications and consequences. The stimulus then explains that applying a rule to a case involves deciding whether the case falls into the appropriate categories. The stimulus finalizes the explanation by stating that decisions establish legal effects rather than matters of fact.
The stimulus can be very confusing, because it involves disassociating fact from legal decisions. The best solution in a situation such as this is to reference the question, which asks you what must be true. That means that it is more important that you can match the choices against the stimulus than that you grasp every concept in the stimulus, so you should just go to the choices.
Answer choice (A): Since the stimulus draws a distinction between legal rules and matters of fact, you should not choose a response that concerns a similarity between those. This choice is wrong.
Answer choice (B): Once again, the stimulus draws a distinction rather than a similarity between legal rules and matters of fact, so this choice is wrong. Remember, the stimulus does not offer any rules about “matters of fact.”
Answer choice (C): This attractive choice is nevertheless incorrect. Making a legal decision does involve matters of fact, because it involves judging whether the facts of the case fall in the appropriate categories to invoke a legal rule. The decision itself does not establish fact, but the decision utilizes fact.
Answer choice (D): This choice is wrong, because you should not assume that the rule can decide for itself whether it applies. A judge or some other person must decide, even if the rule provides the relevant instructions.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice. When the facts of the case fall into a category, they invoke a rule, but using a rule is equivalent to a legal effect rather than a matter of fact. That means that invoking a rule is not a matter of fact. That does not have to make sense, because a must be true question is about whether the stimulus forces the response, not whether the response makes sense in reality.
