LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 8917
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#23108
Complete Question Explanation

Method of Reasoning-SN. The correct answer choice is (B)

Sasha asserts that handwriting analysis should be banned as evidence of character in courtrooms, because handwriting analysts frequently exaggerate the reliability of their analyses.

Gregory argues that handwriting analysis might be unreliable right now, but if a licensing board were established to create standards, handwriting analysis would become legitimate evidence of character in courtrooms.

You are asked to identify the nature of Gregory's response, so you should focus on the fact that he acknowledges Sasha's argument as currently applicable, but does not seem to believe that there should be a perpetual ban on handwriting analysis as character witness, provided some additional measures are taken.

Answer choice (A) Gregory doesn't ignore Sasha's evidence, and in fact starts off by acknowledging her evidence, so this choice is wrong. Gregory proposes an alternative solution to any assumed perpetual ban, and does not dispose of Sasha's observations.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. Gregory doesn't defend any principle in the common sense of the word, so this choice seems pretty horrible. However, since all of the other responses are in no way similar, you should review this choice and realize that the restricted class refers to licensed professionals and the principle is that handwriting analysis is legitimate. Even though it makes sense to expect that "principle" usually refers to general forms of thought rather than fairly specific judgments, the use of "principle" in this choice is in fact just as correct.

Answer choice (C) Gregory does not include any evidence in his argument, and does not make any broader assertions about general principles.

Answer choice (D) We can assume that Gregory accepts Sasha's argument, merely proposing that any ban need not be perpetual. Sasha makes no self-contradictory statements, and Gregory accuses her of none.

Answer choice (E) Gregory does not assail Sasha, but if he were to show that her argument manifested the quality it condemns, he would have to show that her argument is an exaggeration (which is the condemned quality). You might yourself presume that Sasha's argument must be an exaggeration if Gregory's licensing board is possible, but the fact is that Gregory never demonstrates that his proposed solution is possible. This choice is wrong, and perhaps the easiest way to reject this choice is to keep in mind that Gregory had no problem with Sasha's assertions, and simply sought a different solution to a mutually acknowledged problem, so choosing a response that implies a highly critical sense is just out of the picture.
 est15
  • Posts: 94
  • Joined: Aug 28, 2013
|
#15535
When I was attempting this question, none of the answers stood out to me so I just skipped it. Why is the answer B? I didn't get the impression that there was a principle in the passage because I thought principles were supposed to be generalized statements and this entire passage was talking specifically about handwriting analysis.
 Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1153
  • Joined: Apr 11, 2011
|
#15547
Hi,

In that one, the principle being defended is that handwriting analysis is a legitimate courtroom tool--provided that such analysis is restricted to a class of analysts certified by a board that sets professional standards,

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

Steve
 egarcia193
  • Posts: 41
  • Joined: Jun 25, 2017
|
#37807
I don't understand why B is correct I chose C but B is saying that he defends a principle by restricting the class it is applied to and I don't see how he does that, he does not restrict or leave out anyone who the principle applies to prove his point, so how is C right ?
 AthenaDalton
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 296
  • Joined: May 02, 2017
|
#38090
Answer choice (B) restricts the class by stating that handwriting analysis evidence should only be admitted where the individuals who are going to testify are first licensed and screened by a handwriting licensing board. The argument is that if the pool of experts is both limited to licensed experts and governed by professional standards, the exaggerated, unreliable testimony won't be offered anymore.

To put it different, Sasha is saying that handwriting experts "habitually" exaggerate their testimony, so they should all be banned.

Greg responds by saying that the pool of experts should be narrowed down and have rules imposed on them that limit their ability to exaggerate, which will take care of the problem of exaggerated testimony.

I hope this makes sense! :) Good luck studying.

Athena Dalton
 lsatworld
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: Jun 26, 2018
|
#47296
Hello Powerscore,

How come “specific evidence” in (B) doesn’t refer to the fact that there is “no licensing board to set professional standards”?

Thank you!
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 5153
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#47305
I read "specific evidence" as something akin to an example, lsatworld, or perhaps the results of a study or experiment. More than that, though, is that no "general principle" is abstracted from specific evidence here. That would look something like this:

Establishing professional standards and creating a licensing board for handwriting analysis would make such evidence sufficiently reliable to use in court. Therefore, any evidence offered by a purported expert that has been subjected to such standards and restrictions should be reliable enough to use in court.

I hope that's sufficient to illustrate the difference between what answer B described and what actually happened in this stimulus!
 lsatworld
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: Jun 26, 2018
|
#47480
Thank you very much for the response!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.