Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: LR question from June 2008, Section 2, #22  (Read 860 times)

leisuregirl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
LR question from June 2008, Section 2, #22
« on: July 20, 2009, 03:42:41 PM »
Hi can anyone help explain the correct answer choice? The question is as follows:

If violations of any of a society's explicit rules routinely go unpunished, then that society's people will be left without moral guidance. Because people who lack moral guidance will act in many different ways, chaos results. Thus, a society ought never to allow any of its explicit rules to be broken with impunity.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument:

A- takes for granted that a society will avoid chaos as long as none of its explicit rules are routinely violated with impunity

B- fails to consider that the violated rules might have been made to prevent problems that would not arise even if the rules were removed

C- infers, from the claim that the violation of some particular rules will lead to chaos, that the violation of any rule will lead to chaos

D- confuses the routine nonpunishment of violations of a rule with sometimes not punishing violations of the rule

E- takes for granted that all of society's explicit rules result in equally serious consequences when broken

Initially I chose A. I realize that the author takes a big leap from "routinely" to "never," but it's still not crystal clear to me as to why D is correct. I'd appreciate any input I can get. Thanks!

ssilver0210

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 212
    • View Profile
    • Silverman Bar Preparation
    • Email
Re: LR question from June 2008, Section 2, #22
« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2009, 09:15:13 PM »
Are you certain that D is incorrect?
I provide tutoring both for the LSAT and the MBE at very reasonable rates.  I provide a free hour to all students to try out the tutoring.  Feel free to contact me at silvermanbarprep@gmail.com for tutoring inquires or to set up a free lesson. Visit my blog @ http://www.mbetutorial.blogspot.com

leisuregirl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: LR question from June 2008, Section 2, #22
« Reply #2 on: July 24, 2009, 02:32:54 PM »
Sorry guys, I meant that D is correct. River, does this change your explanation?

garlicknots

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: LR question from June 2008, Section 2, #22
« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2009, 11:21:02 PM »
Well.

It says "routine punishment...chaos" Then the prompt says that a society should "never ..unpunished".

The the reason that D is correct is that it is a far way away from routinely breaking the law to never allowing someone a break.

A simplied example: 1 instance of jaywalking will not necessarily result in chaos per the stimulus (because it is not routine) and thus it may not need to be punished. Whereas everyone everyday (routinely) jaywalking would lead to chaos.

On occasion, it might be ok to not punish someone so the never requirement is extreme.

Or so I think.
 

River

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
    • View Profile
Re: LR question from June 2008, Section 2, #22
« Reply #4 on: July 28, 2009, 10:56:11 AM »
If violations of any of a society's explicit rules routinely go unpunished, then that society's people will be left without moral guidance.
=routinely unpunishment---no moral guidance
                      +

Because people who lack moral guidance will act in many different ways, chaos results.
=no moral guidance---choas

: RT----CHoas:contra( no choas----~RT unp(1))

 
Thus, a society ought never to allow any of its explicit rules to be broken with impunity.

= No Choas---punishment MUST(2)


1+2==~routine unpunishment-----punishment Must:
contra=~punishment MUst(sometimes punishment or unpunishment)----routine unpunishment.