A distinguished British judge, Justice Upton,

Answer choices

1. A

   Premise8% picked this

   There is nothing much wrong with the

   This is the final claim, which is one of the two premises (joined by and). It's very uncommon for the final claim to be the main conclusion on a Main Conclusion question.

   8%
2. B

   Never Said1% picked this

   Judges should be given a greater part in administrative

   We're not fishing for any new ideas here. We're just trying to find the answer choice that matches the first claim in the quotes.

   1%
3. C

   Correct63% picked this

   Judges are qualified to decide upon the reasonableness of a government

   Why this is right

   This matches the first claim in the quotes (which includes referential text from before the quotes). This claim is supported by the final two ideas, joined by an and. Judges are qualified to decide upon Judges should be well-equipped to answer the question of whether the reasonableness of a government minister's administrative decision some administrative decision by a government minister is reasonable

   Skill tested: Main Conclusion · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   63%
4. D

   Never Said Reversed Logic11% picked this

   If something were badly wrong with the legal system, judges would be ill-equipped to determine whether a government

   This is just a reversed logic version of the conditional premise. The conditional premise was if judges were not well-equipped, something badly wrong This says if something badly wrong, judges are not well-equipped

   11%
5. E

   Never Said Opposite Logic17% picked this

   If judges are well-equipped to determine whether an administrative decision is reasonable, there is not anything badly wrong

   This is just a reversed logic version of the conditional premise. The conditional premise was if judges were not well-equipped, something badly wrong This says if judges are well-equipped, then nothing badly wrong

   17%