PT15.S2.Q20

PrepTest 15 - Section 2 - Question 20

Hide analysis

S. R. Evans: A few critics have dismissed my poems as not being poems and have dismissed me as not being a poet. ███ ███ █████████ ██ █████████ ███ ██ ████ ████ ████ █████ ███ █████████ ██████ ██████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███████ ██ ████████████ ████ ███ ████ ████ █████ ███ █████ █████ ████ ███████ ███████ ██████ ███████████ ███ █ ████ ████ ███ ████ ██ █████ ████████ ████ ██ ██ ████████████ ██████ ███████████ █████ ██████████ █████████ ██████ ██ █████████ █████ █████ ███████ ███ ███ ████ ██████

Flawed Argument: Circular Reasoning

Evans concludes that critics' dismissal of Evans' poetry should be rejected; in other words, Evans should be recognized as a poet. Why? Because only true poets recognize poetry, and the critics aren't true poets. This is a sub-conclusion, supported by the principle that true poets—and only true poets—convey poetic creativity in their work. And according to Evans, the critics don't do so.

There's a lot going on in this argument, but let's focus on the claim that the critics are not true poets. This is backed up by Evans' judgment that the critics' work doesn't convey poetic creativity. But Evans being able to recognize poetic creativity requires Evans to be a true poet. So Evans' premise presumes that Evans is a true poet, which is what the argument aims to establish.

Show answer
20.

The argument above is vulnerable ██ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ██

a

presupposes what it ████ ███ ██ █████████ █████ ███ █████████ ████████ ████ ████ ████ █████ ███ █████████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ████ ████████████ ██████ ██████████

(A) accurately describes the argument's flaw of circular reasoning. Evans says that the critics aren't true poets because Evans doesn't recognize their work as poetry. But only true poets can recognize poetry. So Evans' premises assume that Evans is a poet, the very point Evans sets out to conclude.

83%
b

uses the distinction ███████ █████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████ ████████ ████ ████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ █████

This is not something the argument does. In fact, the argument explicitly states that only true poets can be poetry critics. So according to the argument, it's impossible for poets and critics to be mutually exclusive categories.

4%
c

gives no justification ███ ███ ████████ █████ ████ ███ ████████ ██ █ ████ ███ ██ ██████ █████████████ ██ ███ ██ ███ ██████

This isn't something the argument implicitly claims. The definition the argument uses of who is a poet is explicitly linked to the qualities of their poetry. That's incompatible with the idea that the standing of a poet can be independent from their poetry.

5%
d

makes an unjustifiable ████████████ █████ ██ ██ ████████ ████ ████ ███████ ███ ████ █████

(D) has the same problem as (B): it fails to accurately describe the argument. The argument never denies that some critics can be poets—in fact, it outright states that only true poets can be poetry critics. This makes it necessary that all poetry critics are poets.

5%
e

inevitably leads to ███ ██████████ ████ █████ ███ █████ █████ ██ ███████ █████ ███████ █████ ██ ████ ██ ██ █ ████████ ██ █████████ ███ ██ ███ ███ ████

The argument doesn't claim or imply that no poet can criticize their own work. While the argument doesn't directly state that this can happen, it also doesn't say it can't happen. And the idea of poets improving their poetry is simply outside the scope of the argument.

3%

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

It takes about five minutes.

Take the free diagnostic
More free LSAT prep: Sample LSAT questions Full-length diagnostic & practice test All free LSAT resources

Confirm action

Are you sure?