Reading Comprehension

PT18 · S3 · P1 · Q1 Law and Literature Movement

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

The law-and-literature movement claims to have introduced a valuable pedagogical innovation into legal study: instructing students in techniques of literary analysis for the purpose of interpreting laws and in the reciprocal use of legal analysis for the purpose of interpreting literary texts.

Topic

Theories about the cause of the long-term drought in sub-Saharan West Africa, focusing on the "Northern Hemisphere cooling" hypothesis

Framework

Challenge Position

Main Point

Although some meteorologists attribute the sub-Saharan drought to a cooling of the Northern Hemisphere, the evidence actually does not support this cooling hypothesis. The Most Valuable Sentence: Appears in the first sentence of the last paragraph:

P1: Introduction of the Cooling Hypothesis

The passage opens by describing a prominent theory: some meteorologists think the persistent drought in sub-Saharan West Africa is mainly due to long-term climate change—specifically, that a cooling trend in the Northern Hemisphere, from the mid-1940s to early 1970s, played a major role in causing the drought.

P2: Mechanism of the Hypothesis

Here the passage explains the details of how this cooling might work: cooler northern temperatures supposedly changed pressure patterns and pushed the circumpolar vortex (a band of winds) farther south, which then moved the rainfall/kicked the monsoon away from the sub-Sahara. There's also some concern that this could become a vicious cycle, as more snow and ice would reflect even more sunlight, intensifying cooling.

P3: Evidence Against the Hypothesis

Now the author pushes back: the facts don’t actually back up the cooling hypothesis. For instance, the region had plenty of rain during one of the biggest periods of Northern Hemisphere cooling (in the 1950s), and by the 1980s (when the drought was really bad), northern temperatures were going up again. Plus, more recent analyses of water temperatures make it even harder to claim the original cooling was that significant.

The primary purpose of the passage is to

Correct
assess the law-and-literature movement by
Why this is right
The author did indeed assess the movement (an entirely factitious undertaking deserving of no intellectual respect whatsoever) and spends the bulk of the passage doing so by examining Posner's thoughts on the matter. Verbs like "evaluate / assess" are often used when LSAT is trying to be less obvious about "challenge a position / tell someone they're wrong / critique something". An evaluation / assessment is always an opinionated purpose, and if the author's main point was "this thing sucks", then their purpose can be said to have been to evaluate / assess something.
Skill tested: Primary Purpose · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.
89% picked this
assert that a mutually beneficial
Opposite, if anything
Was this passage's main point that "there's a benefit to lawyers studying literature and to literature majors studying the law"? No, if anything, it's the opposite. It's more like, "Check out this dumb legal movement that tries to get lawyers to study literature".
3% picked this
provide examples of the law-and-literature
Out of Scope: examples
If the primary purpose were to present examples of the law-and-literature, we'd be able to name at least 2 or 3 specific pieces of literature that lawyers read, or 2 or 3 specific literary techniques that can be applied to the law. We don't have any such examples. Furthermore, the verb "provide examples" is too presentational / too neutral to fit this passage, which had a Challenge Position opinionated point of view. When you merely present examples of X, you're suggesting you implicitly support X (you're certainly not conveying that you actively oppose X).
3% picked this
dismiss a prominent critic’s recent
Opposite
The author is embracing Posner's (the prominent critic's) recent study, not dismissing it. The author's only chagrin with Posner is that Posner started to soften his critical stance on the movement under pressure of its popularity. But the study stands on its own as a rebuttal of the movement, and the author agrees with rebutting this inane movement.
4% picked this
describe the role played by
Wrong Emphasis
The central topic of this passage was the Law and Literature movement, yet this answer choice doesn't refer to it at all.
1% 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