#5 - Concept Reference, Author's Perspective, Must Be True

[Administrator]

Please post below with any questions!

[eronquillo12]

Hi- could I see an explanation for why E is correct? I chose D, but was stuck between E and D for a while.

[nicholaspavic]

Hi eronquillo,

This is a good question as Answer Option (D) is probably the next best choice after Answer Choice (E). Part of what is going on is the game that the LSAT likes to play with implicit (vs. explicit) discourse. The relevant passage cites can be found starting at line 19 and its statement about not everyone having the same "aims." This is contrasted with the same paragraph's discussion of "fair procedure." The implication being that the Author likes Rawls' methods more than his ultimate goals. Additionally, looking at (D)'s mention of "practicality" is over-reading into the text. We are left in the concluding paragraph with the the author criticizing the "redistributionist idea"but it's not a criticism about practicality. That would be overstating the conclusion.

Answer choice (E) works better as a characterization of the Author's viewpoint. It has slightly broader language with terms like "ingenuity" and "implications." The former is even mentioned in line 19 which talks of Rawls' "ingenious answer."

Thanks for the great question and I hope this helps!

[scerankosky7]

E and C seemed similar to me in that they are both somewhat dual views, can you explain why we ought to rule out answer C?

[atierney]

We can rule out C because of the latter position offered of the two. There is no real skepticism about its cogency here, where we would take cogency to mean logical coherence. The author is mostly admirative in describing the theory (words like "ingenious" in line 19 not only provide a clue to this but also the correct answer here), and it's really only in the last paragraph where we see the author veer away from this reverence to consider the actual consequences and implications of the theory's application. Here of course, we also see why E is the better answer choice, but essentially the difference between the two comes down to the difference between where the critique lies, in the theoretical approach itself or its applications.

Let me know if you have further questions on this.