Q18

[b91302310]

I chose (D) for this question and still do not understand why (A) could be the right one. For (A), it states that the last paragragh presents the "consequence" of extreme interpretation. Whereas, I could not find any "consequence" implied in the last paragraph. Isn't there only the description of these extreme views ? Do these extreme views result in any consequence?

Furthermore, I chose (D) for the reason that the characterizations of these two types of legal reasons could be convoluted to legal scholars (because they are bemused) if such legal reasons interpreted extremely.

So, could anyone explain why (A) is better than (D) and why (D) is wrong ?

Thanks.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT2]

(A) and (D) are very similar answers, and (D) is a very attractive answer, but here are the keys I see --

In terms of (A) --

The final paragraph discusses extreme interpretations, and it does discuss consequences -- "led to" and "resulted in" are close enough in meaning. When formalism is taken to an extreme interpretation, it leads to X, and substantive reasoning resulted in Y.

In terms of (D) --

We have no evidence that the author feels these views are convoluted or inaccurate. To be convoluted is to be twisted around -- there isn't a sense of that here. To be inaccurate is to be wrong, but we don't have evidence that these representations are wrong. The examples certainly show the results of taking laws to extremes, but that's not quite the same in meaning as giving an inaccurate representation.