PT80.S4.13 - The Frauenkirche church

Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
edited December 2020 in Logical Reasoning 2249 karma

After reading the stimulus, I thought one reason why the foundation decided not to rebuild the original organ was perhaps it would cause damage to the other parts of the church. I am just very confused as to why D is incorrect; if the design of the organ had been modified several times before it was destroyed, couldn't that be a potential reason why the foundation decided not to rebuild it? because it could not match the original?

Admin Note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-80-section-4-question-13/

Comments

  • canihazJDcanihazJD Alum Member Sage ⭐
    edited December 2020 8491 karma

    So why if we take extraordinary care to restore this church to its original form do we not restore the organ, despite having the funds to do so?

    D. By the time the church was destroyed the organ had been modified several times.

    Ok, so by the time the church was destroyed, the organ was no longer in original condition. We could probably say the same thing about a lot of features of the church, no?

    We want this destroyed church back in original condition. The organ was:

    original 🎹 - - - - modified🎹 - - - - modified🎹 again - - - - modified🎹 again - - - 💥destroyed

    ☝️ we can build it like this. Why dont we? Because of all these☝️subsequent modifications?

    That doesn't really explain anything. You would have to also say that there was something about the modifications that made reubuilding in original condition somehow undesireable or difficult. But we don't help out answer choices.

    @"ashley.tien" said:
    if the design of the organ had been modified several times before it was destroyed, couldn't that be a potential reason why the foundation decided not to rebuild it? because it could not match the original?

    It wouldn't be rebuilt to the configuration at the time of destruction, the stimulus specifies "original form" and "rebuilding the original", so pre-modification.

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    2249 karma

    I find that I am doing that ALOT "helping out answer choices"
    I was thinking for D, that it was modified several times so the church maybe had no way of pinpointing what the original design of the organ was so decided not to build it so they won't stray from the OG design of the church

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    2249 karma

    so the original design is referring to the form the church had pre-bombing and the foundation's goal is to restore the church to what it originally looked like.

  • canihazJDcanihazJD Alum Member Sage ⭐
    8491 karma

    @"ashley.tien" said:
    so the original design is referring to the form the church had pre-bombing and the foundation's goal is to restore the church to what it originally looked like.

    That's what I read it as. Original - so like when they finished building the church and were all like sweet new church with organ open for business. That church.

    You could say "prior to being bombed in WWII, the church itself was attacked by a dinosaurs twice necessitating repair, the pews were reupholstered, the carpet replaced, and they refinished the pulpit three times. And like so what? The whole rebuilding the church to original condition thing would still be fine. Same with the organ... modifications don't help resolve why they aren't restoring it to original condition.

    @"ashley.tien" said:
    I find that I am doing that ALOT "helping out answer choices"
    I was thinking for D, that it was modified several times so the church maybe had no way of pinpointing what the original design of the organ was so decided not to build it so they won't stray from the OG design of the church

    Pretty sure thats what theyre baiting you to do with that AC. But that's your own assumption. Also they specify "original", and that they had the funds to do it.

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    2249 karma

    Oh. So I should read original as "pre-modification" and pre bombing
    I thought original was more...subjective

  • canihazJDcanihazJD Alum Member Sage ⭐
    8491 karma

    I mean even if you took original to mean just before it got bombed.... like the condition on the day it got bombed. The fact that the organ was modified a few times before that doesn't matter either, since now we're just bringing it back to the way we know it was. I think the issue is perceiving "original" as meaning something slightly different for the organ than it does for the church, something you wouldn't do until D suggests it.

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    2249 karma

    ok, so even if something is modified, it has one original form (because the stimulus doesn't suggest otherwise) and the church's goal is to make sure the F church gets as close to that as possible

  • Ashley2018-1Ashley2018-1 Alum Member
    2249 karma

    and it's odd that they wouldn't want the organ to go back to the way it was but the correct answer choice provides a potential reason why

  • canihazJDcanihazJD Alum Member Sage ⭐
    8491 karma

    @"ashley.tien" said:
    and it's odd that they wouldn't want the organ to go back to the way it was but the correct answer choice provides a potential reason why

    Yes, A tells you why despite being able to and everything else being restored to original, the organ was modernized. Because they need it to be for their intended use of it.

Sign In or Register to comment.