Q25

[alana.canfield]

I debated between A&D. Chose A. I had reasons for and against each.

Reasons to choose A : Lines 23-25. Also, the author mentions case-based reasoning might solve a lot of problems that rigid rule-based reasoning had (lines 38-41). So this hints that focusing on doctrinal rules was an impediment.
Reasons against A : The case-based systems still can use doctrinal rule-based law. So focusing on doctrinal nature of the law is not necessarily a fundamental error. Also, "focusing" doesn't need to imply "overly focusing" or "only focusing on", as I interpreted it above.

Reasons to choose D : Last sentence of second paragraph. Also lines 23-25.
Reasons against D : the word *cannnot* seemed too strong. I realize the last sentence calls the problem "intractable", but it is also focusing on improvements that indicate steady progress.

Any thoughts? RC is by far my worst section... so general advice is also verrrrrry welcome!!!!! Thanks!

[bbirdwell]

My general advice is to maintain a big-picture view of the passage's structure, not only when reading, but also when eliminating answer choices.

This passage presents two possible automated legal systems: doctrinal (rule-based), and case-based. The author's position is that neither one of these is possible now, nor in the near future (end of 2nd and 3rd paragraphs).

So, before even getting tangled up in the answer choices, when reading a question like 25 (what would the author agree with in regards to automated legal systems), we are primed for what our answer will likely say: they're no good.

(A) "fundamental error" is not supported here - the case-based alternative was mentioned (and regarded as a failure) as well.

(B) unsupported

(C) unsupported

(D) yes! this is it. rule-based systems don't work, and case-based systems don't work either.

(E) unsupported

Hope that helps! When in doubt on RC, always lean toward the answer that best matches the overall structure of the passage.