Q5 - The frequently expressed view

[nmop_apisdn2]

I didnt see an explanation for this, so I'll give it a shot.

This is a must be true question with a lengthy stimulus. There is a lot going on here, so we must read through the stimulus with an open mind, knowing that the best way to answer this question is through POE (process of elimination).

(A) is incorrect because the stimulus states "even a written constitution becomes a liberal constitution only when it is interpreted and applied in a liberal way", which shows us how to find a liberal constitution, not a "not liberalone". This could be true, but it doesn't have to be true.
(C) is incorrect because the stimulus never discusses advantages; this answer choice is out of scope.
(D) is incorrect because we are not told in the stimulus about the liklihood on whether a constitution will be liberal or not. Therefore, this answer choice goes way beyond our scope.
(E) is incorrect because this totally misinterprets the last sentence of the stimulus, which states that a "written constitution becomes a liberal constitution only when it is interpreted and applied in a liberal way", which shows that this is a necessary condition (to interpret and apply it in a liberal way) and this answer choice takes it to show that if it is possible to interpret it that way, then it IS that way, which is completely off.

This leaves us with answer choice (B). The reason this answer must be true is because if you noticed the necessary condition of a constitution being liberal when ("when" introduced the necessary condition here) it is interpreted and applied in a liberal way. What I'm trying to say is, it must be true that it is impossible to determine that a written constitution is liberal merely through careful analysis of the written text, since you must ALSO apply it in this way. Therefore, this answer choice must be true.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Great explanation nmop_apisdn2! The best way to really check whether you understand an LSAT question is to try to explain it to someone else. If the explanation is clean and simply, you got it! THe more complicated the explanation gets, the more likely it is that you've got some additional understanding to do!

The only additions I would make to your explanation would be on answer choices (A) and (B).

I would suggest that if a liberal constitution requires something, without that thing, you'd find a constitution that is not liberal. But careful analysis of the text alone will not help you determine whether a constitution is liberal or not. And that's enough to eliminate answer choice (A).

On answer choice (B) you are absolutely right that the word "when" introduces the necessary condition. But "when" typically introduces a sufficient condition. Here it's "only when" that introduces the necessary condition!

Great work!

[AlexY297]

Hi I wanted to double check if this question is regarding about "The frequently expressed view that written constitutions are inherently more liberal than unwritten ones is false..." It is about the written constitution stimulus about main point and the correct answer on that one is A)written constitutions are no more inherently liberal than are unwritten constitutions.

It seems like this question is a different one possibly?

-Thank you,
Alex

[ohthatpatrick]

Hey, this is Q5, which is the second of the pair of questions. This one is Inference.

You were asking about Q4, which is the Main Point question.
https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/foru ... t8552.html

[FavioY178]

Hi! Could someone please help me understand this question? Thank you!

Here is my analysis:

1P: IF written constitution is more than a paper with words on it THEN the words are interpreted AND applied

2P: I didn't find this premise that useful...

3P: A written constitution becomes a liberal constitution ONLY WHEN it [the constitution] is interpreted AND applied in a liberal way

C: Written constitutions are not more inherently liberal than unwritten constitutions. In other words, written constitutions are equal or less inherently liberal than unwritten constitutions.

This is a MBT question therefore wrong answers will be CBT. Answer choices A and B gave me a hard time...

A. The reason I eliminated this answer choice is that we were never introduced to such relationship in answer choice A...

B. For some reason, I can't put this into words but when I read this, it logically makes sense and thus my thinking immediately was that this is the correct answer - a MBT. Could someone please elaborate?

C. There are NO advantages? Too extreme! The stimulus was just concern about which type of constitutions, written or unwritten, are more inherently liberal.

D. More likely? From the stimulus, we can't say if one is more likely than the other, especially when the stimulus didn't really talk about unwritten constitutions...

E. This appears to flip the third premise, 3P...

My concerns are the following:

1. Is my reasoning correct in eliminating the wrong answer choices? If so, was it complete? Similarly, is my reasoning for selecting the correct answer right and if so complete?

2. Going back to answer choice A:

The phrase, "X can lead to Y" does not necessarily mean X will lead to Y, right? If so, it will be wrong to represent "X can lead to Y" as X --> Y, correct?

Also, on July 9, 2012, ManhattanPrep LSAT 1 wrote:

"I would suggest that if a liberal constitution requires something, without that thing, you'd find a constitution that is not liberal. But careful analysis of the text alone will not help you determine whether a constitution is liberal or not. And that's enough to eliminate answer choice (A)."

What exactly does he or she mean? I understand that he or she is taking the contrapositive of the last premise, but once we get that, which is "Not interpreted OR Not applied THEN a written constitution does not become a liberal constitution," how does this help? This is as far as I am following from his or her response (in symbols):

Premise: X --> Y [the contrapositive would be ~Y --> ~X]

Answer Choice A: Z --> ~X

3. Going back to answer choice B (using symbols to hopefully simplify things):

[X - Written constitution becomes liberal; Y - Interpreted and applied in a liberal way; Z - careful analysis of the written text]

If the Premise gives us: X -- > Y

and if the correct answer choice, B, gives us: Impossible to determine "X" MERELY THROUGH Z (this is not a conditional statement, right?)

How can answer choice B be correct? In other words, how can this answer choice B be a MBT?

Thank you!