Reading Comprehension · Humanities
PrepTest 157 · Section 1 · Passage 2
Questions 6–12
Before you start
Open PrepTest 157, Section 1 in your official copy from LSAC and read the passage for Questions 6–12, using the structure guide below. The passage is not reprinted here.
Structure guide
- P1: introduces two opposing views, reports one side's critique of the other, and gives an example of the dispute
- P2: names the critics' two main objections that the example illustrates
- P3: the author answers the first objection with a counterexample and doubts the critics' reply, then reports the defended side's answer to the second objection
Step 2 · The kid passage
Rule Keepers vs. Watchers
Two recess groups argue about four-square. The Rule Keepers sort right ways of playing from wrong ones and push the right ones. Without them, they say, a game that keeps changing would turn into a mess. The Watchers just write down how kids really play. To the Watchers, keeping some rules alive while blocking others is unscientific and will almost surely fail. They point to plays once called wrong that everyone uses now. Take the two-hand serve. The Rule Keepers called it illegal, because Grandpa's old rule book says one hand, and they say the game's history deserves respect. The Watchers answer that it is now everywhere, so fighting it is pointless.
This case shows the Watchers' two big complaints. One is the science complaint: games change by laws like the weather, so fighting change is like ordering the rain to stop. The other is fairness: the Keepers just push the big kids' way of playing onto everyone else, which the Watchers hint is mean.
On science: plenty of rule-keeping has failed, but some worked. The no-spiking rule stuck. The Watchers may reply that it would have stuck anyway. That is a hopeful guess with no proof behind it. Game rules are not like the weather. They come from choices kids make, and kids can be talked into things. On fairness, the Rule Keepers reply that shared rules let any kid join any game. Keepers may look like an in-crowd, but they aim to let kids in.
Step 4 · The courtroom tale
The Case of the Spelling Bee Rulebook
Judge Okafor tapped her gavel. "The Note Takers say the Spelling Club is wrong to enforce its old word list." Their lawyer rose. "Two charges, Your Honor. One: spelling drifts like the tide, so fighting it is silly. Two: the Club forces its own habits on newcomers. Unfair!" Mr. Whitfield stood. "On charge one: some Club rules did stick. My friend says they would have stuck anyway. Where is the proof? None. Spelling comes from people's choices, and people can be persuaded." "And charge two?" asked the judge. "A shared list lets every newcomer compete on the same page. That is a door held open, not shut." The judge smiled. "So you answer the first charge yourself, and you report the Club's answer to the second. Clear as a bell."