PT72.S2.Q16 - There are already more great artworks

Prudenter Discere

I am putting this question out there, because after flagging this question and blind reviewing, I still got it wrong.
Currently, I am blind reviewing my process to improve my LR form, and I am also blind reviewing to address any gaps in understanding.

For this question, when it came to form. I felt pretty good
My steps:
1. Read question stem
2. Read the stimulus
3. Identified the conclusion
4. Answer the why?
5. Tried to identify the flaw (gap in argument)

For step 5, I was able to break down the grammar of the conclusion and the premise. But during the test, I could not see the gap clearly. So I flagged it. I was able to eliminate answer A, B, and C easily. I did not eliminate D and E. I came back to it and chose E.

Specifically, I chose E because the argument seemed to state that contemporary artists are mistaken, Mistaken about what? I presumed on their belief that their works enable many people to feel more aesthetically fulfilled. However, the premise focuses on "more great artworks" that human being could appreciate in a lifetime. So I thought I saw the gap, that the inability to appreciate work over a lifetime could not be lead to people feeling more aesthetically fulfilled.

As I read answer choices E, it seemed to match that during testing condition, but I am unsure it did during BR. Definitely, the difficulty in the answer choices factors in the difficulty of this question as well.

Let see if the flaw in answer E is actually evident in the stimulus
To paraphrase E: The argument assumes, without providing a reason, that the number (count) and variety (diversity) of great artworks already in the world affects (makes a difference to) the amount of aesthetic fulfillment derivable (coming) from any contemporary artwork.

It seems that E is incorrect, because it seems that it is not the number and/or variety of great artwork that makes a difference, it is the inability of human being to appreciate it all in a lifetime. So E seems wrong for the reason. But I still have my doubts on why E is wrong.

But although, I understand what answer choice D is saying. I have no way of understanding how the stimulus would be vulnerable to that criticism. Love to have a some help here clarifying this flaw question.

Admin note: edited title; please use the format of "PT#.S#.Q# - [brief description]"

Admin note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-72-section-2-question-16/

Jonathan Wang

Let's say the Mona Lisa fulfills aesthetic criteria "X" (whatever it is). Now let's say I paint the Lona Misa, a perfect copy that is completely indistinguishable from the Mona Lisa. Does the existence of the Mona Lisa affect the amount of aesthetic fulfillment that's possible to get from the Lona Misa?

The answer, of course, is no. Remember, the two paintings are exactly the same in every way. Anything I liked about the Mona Lisa, I'll feel the exact same way about with the Lona Misa. If the Mona Lisa fulfills X, then so does the Lona Misa. If someone has never seen the Mona Lisa, then the Lona Misa would still fulfill X, and vice versa. This is why E is wrong - the existence of prior art does not change the actual amount of aesthetic fulfillment derivable from a contemporary piece. The Lona Misa has an inherent amount of aesthetic fulfillment derivable from it, and the Mona Lisa's existence doesn't change that.

What the argument is driving at is comparative - you're getting more aesthetic fulfillment than you would otherwise have gotten. So it's not a statement about whether you get fulfillment from the contemporary artwork - it's a question of whether it brings anything new to the table. The Lona Misa isn't boring because it inherently has less value than the Mona Lisa (remember - indistinguishable). It's boring because we've already seen the Mona Lisa, and so we're not getting anything new out of an exact copy. But for someone who has never seen the Mona Lisa, the Lona Misa will have value and the subsequent viewing of the Mona Lisa will be the thing that is boring/not fresh. That's where the answer will come from.

Hope this helps.

Prudenter Discere

Thank you Jonathan, this was really helpful.