Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT124 S4 P2 Q14 Explanation

British Common Law

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

TopicsPrimary PurposeLaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

In England the burden of history weighs heavily on common law, that unwritten code of time-honored laws derived largely from English judicial custom and precedent. Students of contemporary British law are frequently required to study medieval cases, to interpret archaic Latin maxims, or to confront doctrinal principles whose validity is based solely of the English people, common law cannot properly be understood without taking a long historical view.

Yet the academic study of jurisprudence has seldom treated common law as a constantly evolving phenomenon rooted in history; those interpretive theories that do acknowledge the antiquity of common law ignore the practical contemporary significance of its historical forms. The reasons for this omission are partly theoretical and partly political. In theoretical determined facts. To suggest otherwise would be dispiriting for the student and demoralizing for the public.

Legal historian Peter Goodrich has argued, however, that common law is most fruitfully studied as a continually developing tradition rather than as a set of rules. Taking his cue from the study of literature, Goodrich sees common law as a sort of literary text, with history and tradition serving as the text's forms, but also the continuous rewriting of those forms to adapt them to contemporary legal circumstances.

What this question is testing

Primary Purpose

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
14.

The primary purpose of the passage

Answer choices

  1. Correct61% picked this

    explain a paradoxical situation and discuss a new view of

    Why this is right

    Not appealing on a first pass, but we can make peace with paradoxical situation if we revisit our most valuable sentences in the three passages. In Logical Reasoning, Paradox questions almost always set up the last, surprising idea with a "but / yet / however". And that's what happens in paragraph two. We just established that you can't properly understand common law without a historical view, and yet academia seldom teaches common law this way? What a paradoxical situation. The new view is of course Goodrich's.

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

  2. Out Of Scope: "summary"1% picked this

    supply a chronological summary of the history of

    There are two classic wrong answers on Primary Purpose questions: give a summary and compare/contrast We must have been asked to do that more than anything else by our English teachers because the test writers know that people gravitate towards those ideas in a lazy way. What's the 'idea' we would be referring to? 'Common law'? Is this passage a chronological summary of the history of common law? Not even close. A chronological summary would be like "In the 1500s, it was like this. In the 1600s, it was like that."

  3. Too Narrow2% picked this

    trace the ideas of an influential theorist and evaluate the theorist's

    This purpose makes the whole passage sound like it was about Goodrich. The author doesn't offer any evaluation of Goodrich's work. She implicitly agrees with Goodrich, but if her primary purpose were to evaluate Goodrich, then we would see the author explicitly evaluating. Also, we only know about Goodrich's feelings about how common law should be taught. We didn't trace Peter's past ideas and then evaluate his present endeavors.

  4. Out Of Scope25% picked this

    contrast the legal theories of past eras with those of today and suggest how these

    Out Of Scope: "legal theories of past eras" Here's the compare/contrast trap answer. This one feels more tempting because the author's Purpose is to "suggest how modern legal theories should study the legal history of past eras". But this answer is saying that we have some old legal theories (we don't) and some new ones. The author outlines differences (she can't, because there aren't any old ones discussed), and then suggests how we should study these theories (she's suggesting how these theories should study common law).

  5. Opposite11% picked this

    advocate a traditional school of thought while criticizing a

    Our author is closer to criticizing the mainstream (traditional) way that common law is taught while advocating a new trend (Goodrich's suggestion that we study common law instead as a historical text).

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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