to the top

#6 - Must Be True, Author's Perspective, Principle

Administrator
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 6662
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:19 pm
Points: 3,335

Please post your questions below!
Jbontemps
LSAT Novice
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:27 pm
Points: 3

Assuming “Most clearly operative” in the question stem means “most apparent” which I took it to mean, how does it follow that what’s most apparent is D? I still don’t quite see that as the best answer choice.

I do admit that that statement would be one that the author might agree with, but MOST apparent or operative...? I chose C, although, albeit “measures should be taken” was a small red flag for me, it overall summarizes the principle there maybe should be state action inhibiting restrictive covenants, which I sensed was the author’s feeling...
Malila Robinson
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:41 am
Points: 273

Hi Jbontemps,
I would probably rephrase "most clearly operative" into 'most clearly at work' the difference between 'apparent' and 'at work,' to me, is that 'at work' sounds like it is doing something, in this case it is guiding the argument.

The author goes into detail about the issues with the Shelley decision and then states: "Primarily for this reason, neither the (45) Supreme Court nor lower courts later applied Shelley’s approach." This is where answer D comes from.

Answer C has too much strong language in it to match with the tone of the authors argument. We don't know that this is "the most troubling aspect of a practice" and we don't know that any measures that could be taken could 'prevent this practice from continuing in an altered form."
Hope that helps,
-Malila
IneedLSAThelp
LSAT Novice
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:31 pm
Points: 3

I got it down to A and D, but chose wrong. Can you please explain why A isn't correct? I interpreted this question as asking: "What principle can be pulled from this passage/What principle is at work in this passage?" This seemed more like one of those principle questions in the arguments sections. Is my understanding of the questions incorrect?
Malila Robinson
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:41 am
Points: 273

Hi IneedLSAThelp,
Your interpretation of the question seems good (see my explanation above).
Answer A seems to be out of sync with the passage. First, courts failed to use the Shelley decision as precedence, and then the author, who may or may not be a legal scholar, wrote about a confusing aspect of the Shelley decision that could explain other courts' not following the decision. So Answer A seems to be backwards.
Hope that helps!
-Malila
negins
LSAT Novice
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 6:37 pm
Points: 3

I understand why D is correct, but could you please explain why E is wrong? I thought that the author is using the fact that the rationale was problematic to suggest that a new rationale should be provided, which he implies in the last paragraph ("what was troubling was not the covenants' enforcement but their substantive content").
Malila Robinson
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 275
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 10:41 am
Points: 273

Hi Negins,
Answer E is incorrect because no new evidence is offered to support the original ruling. Instead evidence is offered for why the ruling is confusing. The line you cited may suggest that the ruling would be better with new evidence, but at the moment there isn't any, so the principle is based upon what is there now, not what could be there later.
Hope that helps!
-Malila