Some things have been changed for copyrighted purposes.
1) It's apparent that 1 ought to have a will stating how 1 wishes 1's estate to be distributed. This can easily be seen from the fact that, according to current laws, in the absence of a legal will distant realtives whom 1 has never even met have a greater legal right to 1's estate than 1's beloved friends do.Which 1 of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(D) People are generally not indifferent about how their estates are distributed.
(This is the correct answer & I do
(E) One's beloved friends have a greater legal right to one's estate than one's distant relative's do.
(I chose this & it's also the most
tempting answer according to 2 test prep co. Kaplan's explanation of this totally sucked!)
Why isn't (E) right? Maybe I didn't properly negate it. I really like (E)!
I really struggled w/the following one...
2) R: To become an attorney, a person should be required to have a diversity of experience. The more diverse one's experience, the more one will understand the need for compromise.
S: To be worthy of public trust, it's not enough, as you recommend, that one simply have varied experience. Such a person would not necessarily be worthy of public trust.Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the reasoning in S's response to R's statements?
(C) The response attributes to Ruth a view that's more vulnerable to criticism (btw, vulnerable to criticism means weaken, right?) than any she actually expresses.
(D) The response fails to make a needed distinction between personal experience & relevant professional experience.
The correct answer is (C) and I chose (D).
First of all, I'm not even sure I understand what S is saying. Maybe that's why I got this wrong. Public trust so the people will compromise w/him??