Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT124 S4 P2 Q8 Explanation

British Common Law

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

TopicsAuthor OpinionLaw

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

Author Opinion

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
8.

It can be inferred that the author of the passage believes which one of the following about the history of law in

Answer choices

  1. Correct51% picked this

    Modern jurisprudence misinterprets the nature of the

    Why this is right

    This isn't very lovable on a first pass. This is one of those "you better know what you're looking for, or else this answer won't resonate" type of answers. Since modern jurisprudence treats law as a timeless set of rules, but the author believes that common law can't be properly understood without a long historical view, she would agree that modern jurisprudence is getting it wrong.

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

  2. Too Strong: proves / irrelevant Opposite6% picked this

    The history of law proves the original forms of common law to be antiquated and

    Our author's main point is that the history of law is very relevant to understanding common law. She might agree that many of the earliest laws are antiquated, but she thinks that the study of jurisprudence needs to honestly reflect that jurisprudence is just an amalgamation of this long historical tradition.

  3. Opposite13% picked this

    The history of law, if it is to be made applicable to modern jurisprudence, is best studied as a system of rules

    The author is on the same side as Goodrich, thinking that common law should be studied as an ongoing historical story, more like a literary text than a timeless system of rules.

  4. Opposite20% picked this

    Mainstream theories of modern jurisprudence overlook the order and coherence inherent

    Mainstream theories, by trying to portray common law as a timeless system of rules, are actually overemphasizing order and coherence and overlooking the messy historical influence in common law.

  5. Bad Match: 2nd Half10% picked this

    Mainstream theories of modern jurisprudence, by and large devoid of a sense of legal history, are unnecessarily dispiriting to

    The first half makes sense, but the second half is the opposite of what the passage is saying. Modern jurisprudence has been avoiding history because THAT would potentially be dispiriting to students and public alike. We could fix this answer by saying, "Mainstream jurisprudence, by avoiding a sense of legal history, is attempting to avoid being unnecessarily dispiriting to students/public."

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