Reading Comprehension

PT109 · S2 · P4 · Q27 Jeremy Bentham

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

By the time Bentham turned his interest to the subject, late in the eighteenth century, most components of modern evidence law had been assembled.

Topic

The evolution of evidence law, particularly Jeremy Bentham's influence on it.

Framework

Old / New

Main Point

Jeremy Bentham proposed a radical shift in evidence law, pushing for broader admissibility of evidence, and although some exclusions persist today, his ideas laid the foundation for modern evidence law. ()

P1: Historical Context of Evidence Law

Back in late 18th and 19th century, evidence law had some strange rules by today's standards, such as forbidding parties from testifying in their own cases.

P2: Nature of Evidence Exclusions

Evidence exclusions were commonplace, often for rational reasons like hearsay being unreliable, but sometimes exclusions occurred even when they should have been included.

P3: Push for Reform

Efforts to reform the complex and tradition-bound evidence law were often blocked, but Bentham proposed admitting all evidence that relates to the dispute, with few exceptions.

27.

The passage is primarily concerned with which one of the following?

  1. Correct

    suggesting the advantages and limitations

    Why this is right

    This ends up being our best available answer. Bentham's contribution to evidence law was indeed a legal reform. The author suggested advantages of Bentham's reform by disparaging the pre-Bentham landscape: - among common-law doctrines there were principles that today are regarded as bizarre - even defendants in criminal cases were denied to the right to testify - extreme in its irrationality - Yet such evidence was mechanically excluded even where it was relevant and reliable - morass of evidentiary technicalities - reform was frustrated And the author suggests the limitations of Bentham's legal reform in the 4th paragraph, where she suggests that his principle allows a lot of inherently unreliable or misleading testimony to now be admissible (perhaps even including evidence that's more likely to produce a false jury verdict than a true one).

    Skill tested: Primary Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

    69% picked this

  2. summarizing certain deficiencies of an

    Too Narrow

    This covers the discussion in paragraphs 2 and 3, although the author was summarizing deficiencies of an outmoded "law of evidence". It might be too much to say she was talking about an outmoded "legal system". But more importantly, nothing in this answer choice reflects that the passage talked about Bentham, the New, the revolutionary idea. This answer sounds like the whole passage was about the Old pre-Bentham world.

    19% picked this

  3. justifying the apparent inadequacies of

    Wrong Emphasis

    Wrong Emphasis: current law Out of Scope: justifying inadequacies This passage had very little to do with current evidence law, other than that the passage focuses on a figure who contributed ideas that influenced evidence law enough that we can still see their effects today. But the passage was 95% about the late 1700's -- what evidence was like pre-Bentham and then what Bentham's suggestion for reform was. At no point is the author saying, "Today's evidence law is inadequate, but I can explain why."

    4% picked this

  4. detailing objections to the nonexclusion

    Too Narrow

    This would only cover content in the 4th paragraph. That's the only part of the passage in which the author raises some objections or difficulties with Bentham's principle.

    6% picked this

  5. advocating reexamination of a proposal

    Out of Scope: advocating / dismissed

    Bentham's principle was never dismissed by the legal profession. It was "demoted" from a rule to a default attitude, but Bentham's proposal successfully changed the default attitude of the legal profession in regards to evidence. The author is also just telling us a story about Bentham and his impact, not advocating a reexamination.

    3% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free