#24 - Must Be True, Author’s Perspective

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=11646)

The correct answer choice is (B)

The author’s perspective on eighteenth century lawyers can be gleaned from a reference to those lawyers on line 25: they had “vested interests” and deferred to precedent and tradition. Clearly the author questions both their motivation and general approach. Correct answer choice (B) provides the best description of the author’s attitude, and if there is any question, the process of elimination would quickly bring us to the right answer; the author is certainly not sympathetic, respectful, or ambivalent (that is, unsure) about the referenced lawyers, nor is the author quite scornful—just critical of the interests and focus of the average eighteenth century lawyer.

[est15]

I looked at lines 24-26 to help answer this question. The author's attitude toward 18th century lawyers is negative so I was down to B and D. Is D wrong simply because it's too negative? The author seemed frustrated by the lawyers though so I thought the answer should have been more negative than critical.

[Steve Stein]

Hi,

That's an interesting question which, as you mention, can be answered in part by looking at the extreme language in answer choice (D). "Scornful" is an extremely negative term; the author is not quite contemptuous of 18th century lawyers. The author is, however, critical, allowing that some practices of the era would be considered bizarre by today's standards.

I hope that's helpful! Please let me know whether this is clear--thanks!

~Steve

[anthonychernandez]

I understand the explanation of B being correct, though I'm frustrated because my wrong answer here (E) I think represents a common mistake that I personally make on reading comp.

I think I often under-infer or am too cautious in inferring for questions similar to this. The only place that I remembered lawyers being mentioned was in paragraph 3 ("vested interests of lawyers...") and I searched to find any other reference. The fact that there was only a single reference to 18th century lawyers made me extra cautious.

Personally, I wouldn't say that speaking to someone's "vested interests" is critical, it feels more objective (senior citizens have a vested interest in protecting Social Security, high school seniors have a vested interest in doing well on the SAT, etc) though of course, it's not what I think of that term, but how the author used that term. Paired with "reform was frustrated" and this resistance blocking a reasonable reform to the law, I now see it as "critical".

Not really a question here, just processing it out loud to help me next time.