#14 - Concept Reference, Must Be True, Subject Perspective

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

The correct answer choice is (B).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

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

[PresidentLSAT]

Hey Powerscore;

I kindly need some help with my understanding here. What is the rationale behind B and what is the support? I guess B is saying that by eliminating the limitations and narrow mechanisms in the reconstruction of facts, one's background becomes irrelevant. I still don't see the connections here.

The other answer choice (D) seemed more supported. The passage lists problems inherent with objectivism which makes it inherently flawed. It's the flawed nature of objectivism that makes the reconstruction of facts distorted. With personal stories, we don't have to worry about fluency in legal language; we don't have to worry about narrow cognition or the disregard of emotion.

With all of this, it is not unreasonable to infer that personal stories are more likely to lead to the reconstruction of facts better than the traditional form (objectivism).

Where is the support for B?

[atierney]

Mr. President,

I would say briefly without delving too far into other sections, that answer choice B captures the "spirit" of the passage, and you can really just look at the proposed as the correct answer in question 9 as evidence for this. "Some legal scholars have proposed alleviating the harm...by replacing...with alternative forms of legal narrative."

This is directly evidenced, however, in the second paragraph, where the passage discusses the presumption of truthfulness on part of those trained in legal discourse and the rejection, as false, stories not fluent in this formalized, objective language. (lines 32 to 37). The passage then transitions in the final paragraph by referencing the individuals whose presumed opinions are questioned here and their attempts to empower the latter group, that is those individuals who rely upon narrative rather than legal jargon. The idea is that, in empowering them, the system as a whole is deemphasizing the purported power of those with formal legal training, or those who have backgrounds substantially different from the common person.

D is not correct because this is the wrong idea and is neither the reason the legal scholar are referenced in the final paragraph nor an idea implicitly promoted by them, as discussed in the final paragraph. Remember, the bottom line here is that objectivism is founded upon the fatal flaw of assuming a "neutral, objective observer." Such an observer doesn't exist, in spite of our efforts to the contrary, and even with the coming human-computer singularity; thus, the passage argues to push in the opposite direction, one of empathy and understanding of the inherent differences within the subjective perspective.

The issue then is not accuracy in the reconstruction of facts, but rather the effects stated in B.

Let me know if you have further questions on this.