Passage - General Questions

[Administrator]

Passage Discussion

VIEWSTAMP Analysis:

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[lathlee]

Author (L 1-13) (20 - 31) 35-38, 55- 64
Advocates’ professional organizations (L 11-14)
Floretine Guild of Lawyers (14-16)
Dissaistified Client (17-20)
English civil law courts : ( L 31 - 35)
Ecclesiastical advoctes ( L 38 - 41)
Church Authorities by the mid-14th century : (L 44-47)
Council of Basel mid-14th century (L 47-51)
England, some complains towards cannon lawyers : (L 51 - 54)
(Trap of many asserted viewpoints)

Structure: P1: Mid-14th century, despite the expectation professional associates would a prominent role in enforcing high level of standard, cannon lawyers guilds did not including florentine guild of lawyers.

P2: two possible explanations for disciplinary proceedings are rare 1) medical cannon lawyers observed the professional standards scrupulously. 2) the enforcing mechanism was inefficient and most escaped without much trouble.

P3. explain the english civil law courts and ecclesiastical advocates by the two theories in P2: Also, In English civila law courts, civil courts functioned better than the church courts. Ecclesial advocases were less ethical failures than civil courts is a weak argument. (Trap of CC)

P4. church authorities included council of basel and in England medieval church records (with extremely rich records) show that there were huge complainings about cannon lawyers Not meeting the ethical standards and shortcoming of these canon lawyers

P5. criticisms to these cannon lawyers actually bore the result of these cannon lawyers to adhere self-defense , defending themselves against attacks by nonprofessionals.

Tone: author is critical towards professional cannon lawyers. Somewhat negative, but not too negative towards cannon lawyers.

Author is also Somewhat Cynical to cannon lawyer’s virtue (the alternative inference, namely, that ecclesiastical advocates were less prone to ethical lapses than their counterparts in the civil courts, seems inherently weak)

Arguments: author, so many records and research indicates that the middle 14th century cannon lawyers failed to meet a decent level ethical standard; many cannon lawyer professional organizations in europe also failed to regulate for the cannon lawyers to behave with a standard.

Another arguments, other viewpoints I mentioned, i fail to see any viewpoints to have premises, conclusions in their views.

MP: the argument i just mentioned is pretty much the MP of this RC

[Shannon Parker]

Overall this is a pretty good analysis but there are a couple of pitfalls to be wary of. Do not confuse anecdotal evidence of the author with individual viewpoints. For instance, the florentine guild of lawyers forbidding its members to be involved in disciplinary proceedings, is not a viewpoint per se, but the attempt of the author to use anecdotes to explain a situation.

Also, while your paragraph breakdown is good for determining where specific things are stated in the passage, it is more important to understand the general structure of the passage. For instance the author introduces a topic, offers evidence on a topic, and offers a conclusion based on the evidence. Keep these tips in mind during further practice.

Keep up the good work
Shannon

[lathlee]

I will update with modified versipn one soon