LSAT-16-3-5

valarie

The frequently expressed view that written constitutions are inherently more liberal than unwritten ones is false. No written constitution is more than a paper with words on it until those words are both interpreted and applied. Properly understood, then, a constitution is the sum of those procedures through which the power of the state is legitimately exercised and limited. Therefore, even a written constitution becomes a liberal constitution only when it is interpreted and applied in a liberal way.

5.     If the statements in the argument are all true, which one of the following must also be true on the basis of them?

(A) A careful analysis of the written text of a constitution can show that the constitution is not a liberal one.

(B) It is impossible to determine that a written constitution is liberal merely through careful analysis of the written text.

(C) There are no advantages to having a written rather than an unwritten constitution.

(D) Constitutions that are not written are more likely to be liberal than are constitutions that are written.（B）

(E) A constitution is a liberal constitution if it is possible to interpret it in a liberal way.

the answer is B. why not C? I think B can be right but C can be too.  If you say C is out of scope, B can be considered the same way since nothing about "careful analysis of the written text" is discussed in the argument.