Q19 - Jurist: To ensure that a legal system remains just

[ohthatpatrick]

What does the Question Stem tell us?
Determine the Function

Break down the Stimulus:
Conclusion: Criminal punishment should (to the extent it can amidst its multiple goals) try to guarantee that people can't profit from crimes.
Evidence: In order for the legal sytem to be just, you can't let crime give criminals an unfair advantage over law abiders.

Any prephrase?
Only two ideas here, the conclusion (2nd sentence, indicated by "thus") and the premise (1st sentence). Since the question stem asks us about the first sentence, we're looking for an answer choice that sounds like "premise".

Correct answer:
B

Answer choice analysis:
A) It's a necessary condition for justice, not a sufficient one.

B) Sure. We can call it a principle. It's definitely support for the conclusion (premise).

C) Not a conclusion.

D) It is a premise, but the conclusion listed here doesn't match the actual conclusion, which never said anything about "the MOST IMPORTANT goal of punishment".

E) There is no refutation happening. Just a simple Premise -> Conclusion structure.

Takeaway/Pattern: This seemed like a very straightforward Determine Function problem, for being #19. We should realize that not all problems in the LR "Death Zone" are necessarily terrible. It was easy to decode whether it was Premise, then Conclusion or Conclusion, then Premise because of the "thus". The only two answers that correctly identified our ingredient as a "premise" were (B) and (D), but a conclusion-mismatch quickly kills off (D).

#officialexplanation

[ganbayou]

Hi, I chose A....
Could you de-construct the argument? I may not understand what the argument is talking about...

Thank you

[nnn2108]

Hi Patrick,

Thank you for the detailed explanation! For answer choice (D) why cant we conclude that it is the "most important" given that in the stimulus, it essentially says "if you are going to have any goals at all, you better make sure this one in there". That reads as "most important" to me.

It's like if I said, "Thus, notwithstanding any other goals that studying the LSAT may serve, it should certainly attempt to ensure that you score better than your diagnostic test". That to me seems like the other goals that studying for the LSAT serves (e.g. improving reading ability) is less important than ensuring that you score better on the diagnostic.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding the definition of notwithstanding?

[JorieB701]

Hi Patrick,

Thank you for the detailed explanation! For answer choice (D) why cant we conclude that it is the "most important" given that in the stimulus, it essentially says "if you are going to have any goals at all, you better make sure this one in there". That reads as "most important" to me.

It's like if I said, "Thus, notwithstanding any other goals that studying the LSAT may serve, it should certainly attempt to ensure that you score better than your diagnostic test". That to me seems like the other goals that studying for the LSAT serves (e.g. improving reading ability) is less important than ensuring that you score better on the diagnostic.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding the definition of notwithstanding?

This is a solid question and I'm going to bump it for a response because I feel like very often when "notwithstanding" comes up anywhere, I mess up something about it.

I do think though, in the context of this question, "notwithstanding" isn't saying, "forget about that other stuff b/c it's not as important to this thing I'm gonna talk about right here.." -- I think it's just kind of saying, "all that other stuff aside.." So, it's not that there aren't other goals of criminal punishment, or that they don't matter or they matter less... but it damn well better do this thing too.

[ohthatpatrick]

Nice explanation!

The studying-for-LSAT example is tricking you because you CHOSE the most important goal of LSAT studying.

Pick any other goal and put it in the same sentence, and you’ll see why the syntax/meaning of that sentence doesn’t reveal anything about #1 goal.
"Thus, notwithstanding any other goals that studying the LSAT may serve, it should certainly improve your ability to digest complex writing.”

"Thus, notwithstanding any other goals that studying the LSAT may serve, it should certainly improve your ability to sustain your concentration for hours at a time.”

"Thus, notwithstanding any other goals that studying the LSAT may serve, it should certainly improve your ability notice when people are exaggerating.”

etc.

The author identifies “ensuring that crimes are profitless” as IMPORTANT, not most important.

The first sentence says, “to ensure our legal system is just, it is IMPORTANT to keep crime profitless.”
I could say, “to ensure your law school application is considered favorably, it is IMPORTANT to have good letters of recommendation. Thus, notwithstanding all the other things you need for your app, you should certainly attempt to have good letters of rec.”

Notwithstanding = “if we set aside this concern for a second” or “to the extent that we’re limited by this other factor”.

Notwithstanding his bad breath, Paul was the perfect prom date.
Notwithstanding his use of drones, I agreed with many of Obama’s policies.
Witnesses who take the stand should always tell the truth, notwithstanding their right to avoid self-incrimination.