LSAT 90 – Section 2 – Question 11

LSAT 90 - Section 2 - Question 11

May 2020

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:05

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT90 S2 Q11
+LR
+Exp
Necessary assumption +NA
A
4%
154
B
1%
151
C
3%
147
D
91%
161
E
1%
149
127
137
146
 +Easier 146.031 +SubsectionMedium

This is an NA question.

The argument begins with a pretty long sentence that turns out to be just context. It tells us similarities between the “chorus” in a play and the “narrator” in a novel. They share many similarities. Both introduce a point of view untied to other characters. Both allow the author to comment on the characters’ actions and to introduce other information.

With the word “however,” we transition from context to argument. And it’s a simple argument with one premise and one conclusion. The premise is that the chorus sometimes introduces information inconsistent with the rest of the play. The conclusion is that the chorus is not equivalent to the narrator.

What’s the missing link? It’s a premise-to-conclusion bridge. We have to assume that the narrator never introduces inconsistent information.

This is what Correct Answer Choice (D) provides. It says that information introduced by a narrator can never be inconsistent with the rest of the information in the novel. That’s it. And with this assumption, the argument is valid. This is an example of where a necessary assumption is also a sufficient assumption. This tends to happen when the argument structure is simple and therefore there is only one assumption to bridge the premise to the conclusion.

Answer Choice (A) is attractive. It says the narrator is never deceptive. This sounds necessary, right? Because the premise said the chorus was deceptive and so in order for the narrator to not be equivalent with the chorus, it must be that the narrator is never deceptive. But no, this isn’t necessary. The premise just said that the chorus sometimes introduces information that’s inconsistent with the rest of the play. That doesn’t mean the chorus is being deceptive. We’re projecting intent onto the chorus without evidence. Maybe they’re trying to deceive. Maybe they’re trying to help us see through the deception of a character in the play. The chorus is telling the truth to the character’s lies. So no, (A) is not necessary. The narrator can be deceptive and the conclusion can still follow that the narrator is not equivalent to the chorus.

This also explains why Answer Choice (E) is unnecessary. (E) claims that authors sometimes use choruses to mislead audiences.

Answer Choice (B) says the voice of a narrator is sometimes necessary in plays that employ a chorus. What? Get out of here with this basic BS. This is just a mish-mash of ideas from the stimulus. There’s no reason why a play that employs a chorus must also employ a narrator.

Answer Choice (C) claims that information necessary for the audience to understand the events in a play is sometimes introduced by the chorus. No, this isn’t necessary. Let’s say that all the information introduced by the chorus is “extra” information: nice to have but not required for the audience to understand the play. What impact would that have on the argument? Not much. The narrator can still be not equivalent to the chorus as long as the narrator does what (D) says.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 90 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logic Games

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply