LSAT 104 | Section 3 | Reading Comprehension: Q1

RC Question 1 Explanation

DISCUSSION: The passage is an argument. The author shows that existing solutions are ineffective, in order to lead up to his conclusion: we should allow those who have heard about crimes to sit on juries.

___________

1. The first half of this is right. But the author doesn’t want to add new remedies. The author wants to change what “impartial” means.
2. This only describes the first half of the fourth paragraph. It ignores the author’s conclusion that we should allow jury members who had heard of the crimes.
3. This only describes the third paragraph, and the description is half wrong. We know that voir dire is the most popular remedy, but we don’t know if it is the worst.
4. This only describes part of the third paragraph.
5. CORRECT. This restates the author’s conclusion, which can be found on lines 51-58. Since the rest of the passage merely led up to the conclusion, this covers everything.