#24 - Specific Reference, Must Be True

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=14182)

The correct answer choice is (D)

In our Passage B VIEWSTAMP discussion, we said that the function of the second paragraph of Passage B was to implicitly apply the theory of justice in transfer to the case of Native Americans in North America. The correct answer choice to this question will describe this relationship between Passage A and the second paragraph of Passage B.

Answer choice (A): This answer choice is incorrect because rather than providing a broader version of the theory described in Passage A, the second paragraph of Passage B applies the broadly stated theory from Passage A to the narrow context of Native Americans in North America.

Answer choice (B): Here, the answer choice reverses the relationship between Passage A and the second paragraph of Passage B.

Answer choice (C): The second paragraph of Passage B applies just one portion of Passage A to a specific case. The structures of Passage A and Passage B are entirely distinct.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. The Passage A theory referenced here is the principle of justice in transfer, which tends to support Passage B’s view that certain land should be returned to Native Americans.

Answer choice (E): In this case, the answer choice is incorrect because it states the opposite of the relationship between Passage A and the second paragraph of Passage B, which implicitly applies the theory presented in Passage A, rather than attempting to undermine it.

[gintriag]

Here is my analysis. The relation between passage A and second paragraph of passage B is

(A) Passage B does not attempt to develop a broader version of the theory presented in passage A. Passage B outlines a real case of property transfer but not addresses a wider version of the moral theory of passage A.

(B) To be honest, I chose this option. Both passages complement each other. For me this answer is not wrong, but being more insightful, I feel it super strong when it uses "purports to state facts". Maybe the powerscore staff can help us clear out where is the mistake.

(C) The subject matter of both passages is the same "Transfer of property from one owner to another". It is asked in question #23.

(D) This is the correct answer. I think it is the correct one because of the order of the passages presented. Passage A outlines the moral theory behind just property transfer and then passage B is a real case about it. Maybe the powerscore staff can help clarifying why exactly this is the correct answer and if there is an importance of the order of the passages. What if the passage B had been presented first?

(E) Rule out of contention. Second paragraph of passage B does not undermine the theory of passage A.

I have a question for the PowerScore staff, what are the arguments of both passages? Thanks,

[Clay Cooper]

Hi gintriag,

Thanks for your question!

I think answer choice D is correct because, specifically, in passage A, the author discusses situations in which the history of the ownership of particular pieces of land contains injustices; this author then outlines the principle of rectification, which has been developed as a theoretical way to deal with such situations. This principle calls for the return of such lands to their rightful owners, to correct for the injustices in their history.

Passage B provides a specific example of a real-world situation in which the principle of rectification should be applied (according to its author): the case of lands lost by Native Americans in violation of federal law.

Thus, A presents a theory which supports the argument made in B.

I hope that helps!

[ashpine17]

I still don't get how B is incorrect. It seems to me that both B and D could work. WHy can't specific evidence be used to support a theory?

[Adam Tyson]

You're asking the wrong question, ashpine! The question is not whether facts can support a theory (of course they can!), but whether the second paragraph of passage B is stating facts that purport to support the argument in passage A (it is not). The facts in that second paragraph about what happened to native lands after Europeans invaded do nothing to support the argument in passage A about what ought to be done in situations of past injustice, and the author doesn't offer those facts with the intention of supporting that argument. While the facts and the argument are related, the former aren't used as evidence to support that argument. Rather, it's just that the argument could be applied to those facts.