LSAT 109 – Section 4 – Question 03

LSAT 109 - Section 4 - Question 03

December 2000

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:49

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
PT109 S4 Q03
+LR
+Exp
Point at issue: disagree +Disagr
Rule-Application +RuleApp
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
0%
160
B
3%
157
C
97%
166
D
0%
E
0%
164
120
130
140
 +Easiest 150.49 +SubsectionHarder

Muriel: I admire Favilla’s novels, but she does not deserve to be considered a great writer. The point is that, no matter how distinctive her style may be, her subject matter is simply not varied enough.

John: I think you are wrong to use that criterion. A great writer does not need any diversity in subject matter; however, a great writer must at least have the ability to explore a particular theme deeply.

Speaker 1 Summary
Muriel concludes that Favilla isn’t a great writer. This is because Favilla’s subject matter isn’t varied enough.

Speaker 2 Summary
John asserts that having varied subject matter isn’t a requirement for being a great writer. He proposes a different requirement - the ability to explore a particular theme deeply. John’s implicit point is that we can’t conclude that Favilla is not a great writer even if her subject matter isn’t varied.

Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree about whether great writers must write about subject matter with enough variety.

A
whether Favilla has treated a wide variety of subjects in her novels
John doesn’t express an opinion. He doesn’t say anything about Favilla’s writing.
B
whether Favilla should be considered a great writer because her style is distinctive
If John has an opinion, it agrees with Muriel. Since he thinks exploring a theme deeply is a requirement to be great, no writers, including Favilla, are great simply because they have a distinctive style. Muriel also believes Favilla is not great even if she has a distinctive style.
C
whether treating a variety of subjects should be a prerequisite for someone to be considered a great writer
This is a point of disagreement. Muriel thinks Favilla isn’t great because she doesn’t have subject matter that’s varied enough. John thinks variety of subject matter is not necessary to be great.
D
whether the number of novels that a novelist has written should be a factor in judging whether that novelist is great
Neither expresses an opinion about this. Nobody mentions the number of novels a novelist has written and whether this is a factor assessing a novelist’s greatness.
E
whether there are many novelists who are considered to be great but do not deserve to be so considered
Neither express an opinion about this. Muriel does say that Favilla doesn’t deserve to be considered great, but she doesn’t say that Favilla is currently considered great.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 109 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply