Passage Comprehension and Deduction Flashcards

A passage reads: 'Wealth correlates strongly with legal outcomes. This does not prove causation, but it does demand explanation.' What is the author's implicit suggestion?

Answer: The correlation warrants investigating whether wealth causes better outcomes

The author stops short of claiming causation but argues the correlation is significant enough to require a systematic explanation.

A text argues: 'Consent cannot be given under duress. Employment relationships involve inherent power imbalances. Therefore, employees cannot truly consent to workplace policies.' What is the weakest link in this argument?

Answer: Whether all power imbalances constitute duress

The argument leaps from 'power imbalance' to 'duress' without justifying that all power differentials constitute the kind of coercion that invalidates consent.

A passage states: 'Strict liability holds defendants responsible regardless of intent. Critics argue this is unjust. Supporters respond that it incentivizes caution in high-risk industries.' Which response best characterizes the supporters' position?

Answer: Consequentialist: the outcome (safer industry) justifies the rule

Supporters justify strict liability by its deterrent effect and safety outcomes, a consequentialist rather than retributive rationale.

Read: 'Only those with standing may bring a claim. Standing requires a direct, personal injury. A citizen outraged by government waste has no direct injury.' What follows?

Answer: The citizen lacks standing to bring a claim

Applying the stated rule — standing requires direct personal injury — the citizen with only generalized outrage does not qualify.

A passage claims: 'International law depends on state consent and lacks a global enforcer. Therefore it is not truly law.' An objector says: 'Domestic law also relies on consent — through the social contract.' What does the objector attempt to show?

Answer: The criterion the passage uses to dismiss international law also applies to domestic law

The objector uses tu quoque logic: if consent-dependence disqualifies international law, the same reasoning undermines domestic law too.

A text reads: 'Eyewitness testimony is the most persuasive evidence to jurors but among the least reliable.' What tension does this identify?

Answer: High persuasiveness combined with low reliability creates a risk of wrongful conviction

The passage highlights a dangerous mismatch: the evidence type jurors trust most is the type most likely to be wrong.

A passage argues: 'Precedent ensures consistency, but it also entrenches past errors. A court that cannot depart from precedent cannot correct its own mistakes.' What does the author imply about the ideal legal system?

Answer: Courts should have some mechanism to depart from erroneous precedent

The author identifies entrenchment of error as a cost of rigid precedent, implying a system should allow correction of past mistakes.