Q13

[Djjustin818]

I understood this passage really well and got all the questions right except for this one.... I reviewed it, but I still don't understand why A is a better answer than E?

I feel like A describes more of the whole paragraph, whereas the question is asking about only likes 30-33.

Could someone explain please?

[ohthatpatrick]

I think you hit the nail on the head with something you said:

"I feel like A describes more of the whole paragraph, whereas the question is asking about only lines 30-33."

For the vast majority of questions such as this, you would be incorrect to think that we are only being asked about lines 30-33.

When LSAT asks us about the Purpose of anything, it is always an invitation to connect the specific detail they're pointing us to with the broader picture.

Lines 30-33 are the "what" ... "what was said" ... "according to the passage" ... etc.

Primary Purpose of lines 30-33 is the "why" ... "how do lines 30-33 relate to the nearby vicinity"

Here are some other common phrasings of this question:
"the author mentioned ____ in lines XX in order to"
"the author's reference to ___ in line X serves to"
"the author used the phrase ____ in line x primarily to"

These are all examples of the same task: connect the specific detail to the surrounding context.

So, as you said, the author's primary purpose in the 2nd paragraph is to present and acknowledge some of the ways in which court adjudication is superior to family mediation.

The other danger with (E), by the way, is the extreme language. You should always be dubious of extreme terms in RC unless you're able to match them up with something commensurately strong in the passage.

Where in the passage would we support that lawyers are essential for protecting individual rights?

If anything, we could only get from that sentence that the court system is essential. The author is contrasting the court system with mediation. There may be lawyers involved in both contexts, but the court system has a goal of ensuring protection of rights (lawyers are just working within that system), while mediation does not guarantee the full protection of rights. Lawyers may also work in mediation, but there the goals are all the fun stuff mentioned in lines 48-53.

Hope this helps.

[erikwoodward10]

Had no idea what assumption C was referring to. Is this a good reason to eliminate it?