DISCUSSION: Passage A is entirely theoretical. Passage B is practical. The two passages agree with each other, but they’re discussing different aspects of the issue.
The right answer focusses on a subtle aspect of passage B. The second paragraph of passage B is not necessarily the author’s opinion. Instead, the author is merely sketching out a method of reasoning.
This is common in arguments. Authors will describe an argument without necessarily endorsing it. This allows the author to then discuss aspects of the argument or disagree with the argument.
___________
- CORRECT. Passage A is entirely theoretical. The first part of this answer is clear.
You might have hesitated about the description of passage B. But look at lines 48-50….the author says “one natural way of reasoning….is this”.
The author isn’t saying that’s their way of reasoning. They might not agree with it. A central feature of arguments is being able to make an argument you don’t agree with in order to discuss or disagree with that argument. - Passage A never mentions any competing views of property. They talk as if they’re describing the only possible just theory of property.
- Passage A makes no policy recommendations. Policy recommendations are practical, but passage A is entirely theoretical.
- Passage A doesn’t briefly state a view. Passage A’s view is the entire passage. And passage A doesn’t provide an argument to justify their view. We’re just supposed to take their word that this is a good theory of property. The author writes as if they’re obviously describing the only valid principles of property.
- Passage B doesn’t attempt to undermine any views. The author presents a view in the second paragraph, but they don’t agree or disagree with that view.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions
Lyndsie says
This is a ridiculous answer choice to me. Maybe this is just me being a human being, but saying “(some might almost say obvious)” just screams sarcasm, aka it is obvious and I agree with it.
What human being doesn’t read it that way? Is this the difference between the rest of us and lawyers?
FounderGraeme Blake says
You’re correct. The issue is that the author of passage B *also* says that his argument may be impractical, that there might be compromises.
If you take his argument literally, it might involve dissolving the United States, removing all inhabitants other than the original Native American tribes, and returning the land to those tribes.
Does the author *necessarily* endorse that? It’s rather radical. So they have sketched out an obvious argument, but I am also not sure they necessarily endorse it. A lot of people don’t have the courage of their convictions.
Note: This is an old comment but I wanted to clarify the point.
Dommy P says
I feel as if the parenthetical phrase excluded in your quote justifying choice A, “one might almost say obvious,” indicates that the author of passage B does indeed agree with the argument, does it not?
FounderGraeme Blake says
They agree with it but don’t necessarily endorse it. Their proposal is so radical that it might entail the dissolution of the United States. I don’t think they’ve quite gone so far as to commit themselves irrevocably to that idea.
It’s in the same sense as you might say “Obviously we ought to reduce greenhouse gases….but also boy that would be difficult. Hmm this is a troublesome situation.” You can agree some reasoning is obvious but still shy away from taking the painful step of following through on your reasoning.
For another example, should you use your phone less? Obviously, right? And yet….
Note: This is an old comment but I wanted to clarify the point.
Saul says
So we are just supposed to put the entire second paragraph of passage B, from “this:” and onwards, in quotation marks? I thought the use oft he word Ideally was a give away that the author agreed with the view, and also the fact that he calls it “obvious” seems to imply that he agrees with the common sense of the theory.
TutorLucas (LSAT Hacks) says
Remember, the answer choice calls it an argument that the author does not necessarily endorse. It’s clear from the topic sentence of the paragraph that this is a view that the author is presenting, as opposed to something we can say with certainty that the author supports. You’re right that the words “ideally” and “obvious” make it somewhat ambiguous whether the author’s opinion is also laced into the paragraph but there’s a couple points we can make in defense of (A):
(1) re: “ideally”, I’d expect that the author would say something to the effect of “in my opinion” if it were their own perspective (i.e. suggestion of a break between a view being presented, and the author’s own opinion)
(2) even if this is a view the author is considering taking on, phrases like “might also say obvious”, and “this may be impractical” are signs that we can’t say can’t say the author necessarily agrees