Top Law Schools

I don't understand why E is better than A. E only notes a correlation between punitive measures and economic health (there are many other factors at work). But A shows a CAUSATION. And causation is way stronger. A shows that punitive measures have caused deterrence. So punitive measures effectively decreased the amount of irresponsibility relating to bankruptcy.

there's a decent discussion going on about that here.

Manhattan LSAT Noah wrote:there's a decent discussion going on about that here.

not really. I already checked those boards.

.

jcdjgd wrote:Hey bud,

Looking back when I first answered this question, I too answered (A). Like you, my rationale was that this answer would weaken the author's view, since MOST people come out of prison displaying GREATER economic responsibility. Where this answer goes wrong is that the individual who goes to prison is NOT the focus on the au's support for the modern approach. The au focuses on the benefits for the other parties. Check the end of 2nd paragraph/beginning of 3rd paragraph where the au talks about modern methods working toward a greater public good for society/creditors. That's why (E) is better: there's a GREATER economic health for the COUNTRY AS A WHOLE, not just for the individual committing the crime.

Hope this helps.

Hey wow thanks for the clear explanation that helps a lot!

I guess I sort of figured that if the individuals committing crimes are rehabilitated that would affect the economic health as a whole (since less crimes would be committed). Is that too much of a jump to make? It always seemed like for weaken questions, it doesn't need to disprove the arg, it just needs to show that there is a chance it won't work. So I thought showing that criminals are rehabilitated shows that greater economic health could be reached by punitive measures since rehabilitation leads to less crimes which leads to economic health.

But now that I think of it, maybe the author is not denying that punitive measures are a deterrence in the first place. Maybe he is just saying that whether they are a deterrent or not, doesn't make a difference because they cause more harm than good. Thus, answer choice A is irrelevant because all it is showing is that there may be good effects...but thats a given. Sure there are good effects but what the author is saying is that the bad outweighs the good!

.