A law that is not consistently enforced does not serve its purpose. Law without enforcement is not law; it is merely ...
Madelyn-LuskeyJune 6, 2018
confused
I'm still confused as to how the main point is (C)- "the unbiased punishment of prohibited behavior." Can you please further explain how you identified the premises and conclusion?
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
With main point questions you're looking for the ultimate reason why the author is writing this. It's not necessarily the direct conclusion but the overarching meaning of the passage. Sometimes it will just be a restatement of a conclusion, but that's not necessarily the case. That means that you need to approach these somewhat like a reading comprehension question and read the passage as a whole to discern the larger point.
In this passage the author talks about law without enforcement is not really law - explaining that concept at length. Then the author moves on to explain that enforcement of the law must also be fair (unbiased) but not favoring one group of people or another. Which sentences are premises, etc. matter less than reading the whole thing to see what the point of the overall argument is, which is that instituting real law consists of fair enforcement of the law (unbiased punishment of prohibited behavior).
I hope that helps. There's no magic bullet for these. You really have to "read to understand" the whole of the passage, not necessarily dissect each individual sentence.
