Q12

[kimjy89]

I was confused between a, c and e.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Primary purpose questions can be tricky, but it's generally a good strategy to step back from the passage details and ask yourself, "Why did the author write this anyway?"

The author seems to be writing this passage in an attempt to explain to us, what was Marshall's strategy and why was it effective.

Let's take a look at the answer choices...

(A) describes something that occurs in the passage. Unfortunately, it's not the main purpose of writing the passage. Just because an answer choice describes something that occurs, does not mean that it is the correct answer. The correct answer would not just state that the purpose was to reveal the details, but rather explain how the details lead to a successful strategy.
(B) also describes something that occurs in the passage but is not the main purpose in writing the passage. The author uses some small descriptions of how the practice affected African Americans, but only to put the successful strategy into context.
(C) correctly states the primary purpose. The passage is not just about describing the strategy, but also describing what elements lead to it being successful.
(D) stretches the application of the passage too far. There is no attempt to provide guidance to other litigators, but simply an attempt to describe what contributed to Marshall's successful strategy.
(E) is tempting, but focuses too much on the unsound legal doctrine and not enough on Marshall's strategy. The purpose of the passage was not to call attention to the policy of "separate but equal," but rather to describe the successful elements of Marshall's strategy.

Does that help clear things up? Each of (A) and (E) take the passage in the wrong direction. Answer choice (A) fails to address Brown vs. Board of Education (clearly a subject of the passage) and answer choice (E) pulls the topic towards the unsound legal doctrine (part of the passage, but not the main subject, which was Marshall's strategy for challenging the unsound legal doctrine).

[roflcoptersoisoi]

(A) The passage does this to a limited extent by mentioning his tenure at the NCAAP, and talking about the strategy he employed to argue against Brown v Board. But Brown's career before the case this is not the primary purpose of the passage, rather his strategy is. Eliminate
(B) Marshall presumably mentioned this when he litigated his cases but this is not by the author, eliminate.
(C) Yep. bingo
(D) The goal of the passage is not to provide guidance to other lawyers, it merely describes the legal strategy he employed in order to win the case he argued before the Supreme Court.
(E) This is tempting. The author mentions separate but equal, but his/her primary purpose was not to call attention to it. Rather, the author's primary goal is to substantiate the main point of the passage: The cases Marshall argued before Brown v Board enabled him to successfully argue the latter. The author does this by calling attention to the successful strategy Marshall used to show the contradictory nature of the legal doctrine .

[hnadgauda]

The dreaded primary purpose question. Let's try to prephrase. This passage talked about how Marshall used a wise legal strategy prepare the courts for his eventual victory.

With this in mind, let's look at the answer choices.

A: The details of his career. It doesn't really talk about where he went to law school, where he clerked, etc. It talks about his legal strategy for this one case.
B: This is too general.
C: Right on the prephrase!
D: This isn't necessarily specific to litigators.
E: The aim of the passage is not to raise awareness of how "separate but equal" is illegal.