Question Bank / Reading and Writing / Inferences
Inferences SAT question
Reading and Writing · Information and Ideas · Medium · Answer it here, explanation included.
In documents called judicial opinions, judges explain the reasoning behind their legal rulings, and in those explanations they sometimes cite and discuss historical and contemporary philosophers. Legal scholar and philosopher Anita L. Allen argues that while judges are naturally inclined to mention philosophers whose views align with their own positions, the strongest judicial opinions consider and rebut potential objections; discussing philosophers whose views conflict with judges’ views could therefore blank
Which choice most logically completes the text?
ExplanationShow
Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of Anita Allen’s argument about judges citing philosophers in their judicial opinions. The text indicates that judges sometimes cite philosophers when writing their judicial opinions and that, according to Allen, judges tend to cite philosophers whose views are in agreement with those of the judges themselves. Allen claims, however, that the best judicial opinions consider potential objections and rebut them, which suggests that judges may be able to strengthen their opinions by including discussions of philosophers with views contrary to their own.
Choice A is incorrect because Allen’s claim is that judges could improve their judicial opinions by citing philosophers who disagree with the views expressed in the opinions, which would necessarily require judges to consult philosophical works. Choice C is incorrect because there’s no discussion in the text about making judicial opinions more easily understood by any particular group of readers. The focus of the text is on Allen’s claim that judicial opinions could be strengthened by the inclusion of discussions of philosophers whose views disagree with those of the judges authoring the opinions. Choice D is incorrect because the text presents Allen’s argument that discussing philosophers whose views judges disagree with could strengthen judicial opinions, not that doing so could bring those opinions into line with views that are popular among philosophers.
Drill this skill on Aceit
Adaptive practice, a daily plan, and score tracking take a free account so we can save your work.
More Inferences questions
- Marta Coll and colleagues' 2010 Mediterranean Sea biodiversity census reported approximately 17,000 species, nearly double the number reported in Carlo Bianchi and Carla Morri's 20
- In her 2021 article "Throwaway History: Towards a Historiography of Ephemera," scholar Anne Garner discusses John Johnson (1882–1956), a devoted collector of items intended to be d
- Researchers recently found that disruptions to an enjoyable experience, like a short series of advertisements during a television show, often increase viewers' reported enjoyment.
- Many of William Shakespeare's tragedies address broad themes that still appeal to today's audiences. For instance, Romeo and Juliet, which is set in the Italy of Shakespeare's time
- In the early nineteenth century, some Euro-American farmers in the northeastern United States used agricultural techniques developed by the Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) people centurie
- Some businesses believe that when employees are interrupted while doing their work, they experience a decrease in energy and productivity. However, a team led by Harshad Puranik, w