PT31.S2.Q18 - not all works of art

Comments

• lsatyayy Alum Member

  October 2017 178 karma

  JY's explanation about the question:

  https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-31-section-2-question-18/
• akistotle Member ⭐ 🍌🍌

  October 2017 9382 karma

  I think of it as this way:

  The argument fails to exclude the possibility
  = The argument fails to eliminate the possibility
  = The argument does not eliminate the possibility
  ≈ The argument does not consider the possibility

  The argument is questionable because it did not rule out the possibility that "X can do Y." So the argument would be better if it did say "X cannot do Y."
• lsatyayy Alum Member

  October 2017 178 karma

  Hi Thanks but this question's answer actually implies this arg would be better if it did not say "X can do Y"
• 1 Like

  akistotle Member ⭐ 🍌🍌

  October 2017 edited October 2017 9382 karma

  P: Representation = aesthetically relevant → Context-dependent.
  P: There are no clear criteria for determining whether context-dependent properties are present in an object. (= We can't determine representation is present)
  ——
  C: There cannot be any clear criteria for determining whether an object qualifies as art.

  But the argument does not consider there might be other criteria for determining whether an object qualifies as art.

  So the argument would be better if it did say that other aesthetically relevant properties cannot determine whether an object qualifies as art. In other words, if the argument excluded the possibility that aesthetically relevant properties can determine whether an object qualifies as art, it would be strengthened. If it said that only representation can determine whether the object qualifies as art (I think the argument assumes this without saying), then I think the argument stands.
• lsatyayy Alum Member

  October 2017 178 karma

  Oh wow. I see now. Who are you? LSAT genius?

  Thank you!!!!