Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.1K All Categories
- 27.1K LSAT
- 16.5K General
- 5.1K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 72 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 7 June 2024 LSAT
- 1 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 41 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 1 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.8K Not LSAT
- 3.9K Law School Admissions
- 11 Law School Explained
- 9 Forum Rules
- 580 Technical Problems
- 275 Off-topic
Comments
First, a note about the question statement. Note the “… most justifiably be rejected.” In my mind this question goes into MSS category, where tcr will often not be a 100% ironclad MBT-type deduction.
Tbh, on the real test I got to (D) by POE because I saw (A) as a garbage response just like (B), (C), (E). Yes, A stays within scope (kind of, it does extrapolate to all plays from just one), but I don’t see any info in the paragraph that allows one to reject the point about characters presumed to know how to read. Both Demosthenes and companion might knew how to read, maybe companion couldn’t, we don’t know. I then quickly read D, thought to myself: “Probably right”, circled it and moved tf on, because I knew that resolving this fully would be a huge time sink.
Now in regards to (D), as tcr. This answer choice gives a sort of absolute statement about all ancient Greeks. Demosthenes is a counterexample, which mathematically allows us to reject the statement in (D). I suppose one does have to make an assumption that the character of Demosthenes was written as an ancient Greek for this to be true, but I felt like that was an acceptable assumption given the question type. Imho it’s not important whether the setting of the given scene is Greece or not. What really matters is whether we can reasonably assume Demosthenes being Greek.
Another way to think about (D) is that if it’s not true, and ancient Greeks really did not read silently to themselves, how would Demosthenes character all of a sudden get the idea to do it in the described instance, and also why would an author describe a character doing something that never took place. Again, though I guess we have to make assumption of the character being Greek.
To me, this is a very difficult question, and all of the above might be really wrong, so feel free to take it apart and critique, but this was my thinking on this. I would love to hear others' thoughts as well.
I don’t see how the assumptions for D are any more reasonable than A.
Yes A does have that problem, but in modern exams there has been the trend of questions were very weak answers that commit reasoning flaws.
Sounds to me like you're pulling cardinal sin #1 of the LSAT, pulling outside knowledge into the question.
I have never heard of the play "Knights" or "The Knights".
I don't need to know about the play. The passage takes care of everything for me. We have to assume what the passage says is true. So when the passage gives the play the attribute of being "ancient Greek" we have to accept that.
If I say that Hamburgers are a classic American food, what do you automatically assume? Hamburgers are a food Americans consume. Hamburgers have become associated with Americans.
So, now what we have is an instance where in an ancient Greek play, a character is seen reading to himself. He then has the ability to recite new information to his counterpart. So since the play is ancient Greek, not only did the author of the play write a scene where a character is reading to himself (suggesting the author knows what reading to yourself meant) but the play was seen most likely by ancient Greeks. If you didn't know what reading to yourself meant, and you were watching a play and a character just stopped acting and looked at a book, you'd think he forgot his lines or something. Then he looks up and starts referencing the book to his counterpart, you'd be really confused as to how he got the information, since you don't know he can read to himself.
In order to disprove;
"In ancient Greece people did not read to themselves."
We need to show an instance where it happens. And this passage shows that, and arguably more. The audience had to understand what was going on, the author had to understand what was going on and the actors had to understand what was going on. That's quite a few people.
Unfortunately I think that answer holds more water than any other answer on that question.
I don't know where we draw the line on outside knowledge. In a response to a challenge, the writers suggested that knowledge of the cold war was common and expected. So I don't think it's always wrong to bring in outside knowledge.
I don't this analogy works. The term "ancient Greek play" has a more concrete meaning (i.e. plays developed in ancient Greece between a certain time period).
This was an assumption that I made at first, but in retrospect I do not think it is a commonsense assumption. Plenty of manuscripts exist for plays and movies that were never performed. I'm going to assume that the play was performed though because I don't think it's important to the point I'm trying to make.
This is where I think this question gets messy.
I think it falls under commonsense to know that literacy rates were very low in ancient Greece. For that reason, I would assume it is unlikely the actor could actually read to themselves and instead stimulated the action. Am I making a superfluous assumption?
I find the decision to use a play added unnecessary confusion to this question. I don't think simulating something on the stage should count towards what happens in the society where the play was performed.
If they provided a passage of "Oedipus Rex" and a potential answer choice was:
"In ancient Greece people did not partake in incest"
would that have also been correct?
When the passage says that "Knights" is an ancient Greek Play, that's all we need to know. That is where we draw the line. We accept that "knights" is a play created, made, and attributed to the ancient Greeks.
The more specific the better....since it is specific to ancient Greeks, assuming anything outside ancient Greeks is probably wrong. And we now have an example of a play where ancient Greeks are seen reading to themselves. This is a pretty good indication that ancient Greeks did in-fact read to themselves. My analogy is actually weaker at proving my point than the passage.
If the play is ancient Greek, why shouldn't we assume it was seen by ancient Greeks? Even if it wasn't preformed, the author still had to understand what reading to yourself was in order to write it. Which still demonstrates an understanding. And if he intended the play to be seen, why would he write something into the play that ancient Greeks didn't understand? I don't really think he would.
Literary rates =/= understanding someone is reading to themselves. It is irrelevant. Picture someone who can't read standing next to someone who can. The person who can read is looking at a book. I think the person next to him understands that he is reading to himself. He doesn't need to be literate to understand that. So you have an illiterate actor pretending to read, and audience who is illiterate understanding that the actor is pretending to read, but they still understand what he is doing, why? because people do that and they know what is going on.
Your Oedipus Rex question would be yes, for the exact same reasons above. However, we don't really care about the action taking place in the play. We care about peoples understanding of what is going on. If they understand incest, that means they are aware of what it is, because it happens.
I think what makes this question difficult is the unconventional Q stem: Of the following claims, which one can most justifiably be rejected on the basis of the statements above?
In my opinion, it helps to think of this question kind of like a "MSS, except" Q type (I.e., "When negated, which of the following claims is most strongly supported by the statements above?")
OR
a "NA, except" Q type (I.e., "When negated, which of the following claims is most reasonably required by the statements above?")
ANSWER CHOICES:
(A) TRANSLATION: In ancient Greek plays, if characters are presumed as illiterate, then their illiteracy is specifically mentioned.
(A) NEGATED— In ancient Greek plays, IT IS NOT THE CASE THAT, if characters are presumed as illiterate, then their illiteracy is specifically mentioned.
(A) NEGATED TRANSLATION— In ancient Greek plays, at least one character may be presumed as illiterate, without their illiteracy being specifically mentioned.
Does the stimulus most strongly support this negated translation of (A)?
Does the stimulus (reasonably) require this negated translation of (A) to be true?
No and No. Just because Demo's friends didn't read the tablet themselves doesn't mean they are illiterate. Maybe they are just too lazy to walk two feet to read the tablet themselves. Maybe they are visually impaired and can read Braille, but that damn oracle doesn't care about accommodating the blind. Maybe they fell off a tree trying to knock down a bee hive—even though they're clearly allergic to bees—and they lost their glasses in the fall, and they can't see without their glasses :'(.
(D) NEGATED TRANSLATION— In ancient Greece, some people did read silently to themselves.
Does the stimulus most strongly support this negated translation of (D)?
Does the stimulus (reasonably) require this negated translation of (D) to be true?
Yes and Yes.
FACTS: Demo looked at the tablet while expressing his amazement. The stimulus indicates "whereupon" Demo starts explaining the contents of the tablet to his friends: he explains AFTER his friends press him for info, his friends press him for info AFTER he looks at the tablet.
We can reasonably assume that he at least started to read the tablet silently to himself—the dumb look on his face whilst staring at the tablet leads us to believe he was reading. Therefore he was reading to himself in a scene in an ancient greek play. Therefore its likely that some people in Ancient Greece did read silently to themselves.
Now, I know you mentioned "If we assume the play was performed at least once in ancient Greece (reasonable commonsense assumption), then we might say that because in the performing of the play the actor read silently to themselves AC D can be rejected. I think this is a ridiculous way to go about it. You're assuming the actor that played Demosthenes could read (most people in ancient Greece couldn't read). You're assuming the actor that played Demosthenes actually read something during the performance of the play."
But, (insert @LSATcantwin's Hamburger explanation/analogy here). Plus, considering all the prepositional phrases the stimulus used to emphasize that he was reading—as dumb as it may be in its assumptions—this is definitely the best and the only correct crappy answer choice of the bunch.
OK, re-reading this one in depth for the first time now. I put A on the actual test but I had absolutely no clue. I got this as section 5 and my brain was toast. It all looked like a jumbled mess of garbage to me haha. But now that I am reading it and deeply thinking, it makes more sense.
I think this is actually closer to a MBF than MSS-except. If it was MSS-except, then the other answers choices would all be MSS. But in this case, I think 3+ of the ACs are completely irrelevant. It's looking for a direct contradiction, instead of something that is not supported. Very subtle shades of meaning, of course. But I think this is a type of MBF. Almost seems like a new type of question like a... most strongly rejected? As the true inverse of MSS.
A) This can't really be rejected because based on the stim, it could be true. Not enough information to know.
B ) We have no knowledge of the historicity of the play. Can't be proven or rejected.
C) Doesn't really matter either way whether it was common to read written texts aloud. We're not talking about whether this is a commonplace occurrence. Could go either way.
D) It does require a small assumption, that this play reflects the people of ancient Greece. I don't really like that assumption and wonder if it could be challenged. But we do know that this is an ancient Greek play in which someone reads silently to himself. So this is a direct contradiction and could "justifiably be rejected". Correct choice.
E) We again have no information on whether this was common or a rare phenomenon, but either way it would not be rejected. This could be a groundbreaking play. Or it could be very common. Not enough info to know; therefore incorrect.
I cannot wait for JY's explanation! I need to hear a Jedi master break this down.
I'm left wondering whether the attributing to a play was intentionally done to make it more confusing, or coincidental. If it had just said "In Ancient Greece"... and then summarized the excerpt I would have had no problem with this question.
I disagree. D only requires us to assume that the character of Demosthenes was Greek, which is what most people think that characters in Greek plays are. (Yes, there are plenty of non-Greek characters in Greek plays as well, that's why this it's an assumption) This is all that's needed for Demosthenes' character to be a counterexample against D (and all you need to reject a sort of statement like the one in D is one counterexample). Of course it's possible to come up with reasons against, but this where I think we have to make a decision about whether our assumptions are reasonable without resorting to outside knowledge.
The fact that fantasy and mythology were also parts of Greek plays is unrelated since it has no relation to any of these choices, and since based on the paragraph alone, you can't decisively claim these things to be crazy or nonexistent. Maybe Greeks really believed in their fantasy, or maybe these fantasy stories are real and Grecian gods exist. You can't disprove these statements based on the LSAT passage alone. Remember that plenty of crazy things have appeared on LR over the years — ESP, ghosts, aliens...
Now let's look at assumptions you need for (A):
1) Definitely need an assumption about reading skills of not only Demosthenes' companion (of
which the paragraph gives us nothing), but also other characters in other plays,
2) An assumption about how representatives Knights is of ancient Greek plays, of which
again there is nothing.
3) Finally an assumption about how characters are presumed by the reader.
All these these seem to me way more far fetched than for assumption D, as none of them have any relation to any info actually in paragraph. What do you think?
I'm kinda curious too. Could you please write out a more detailed version of your reasoning to pick A?
yes I remember being very frustrated with this question during the actual exam. I gave this Q 3 passes. I first picked, D, but thought it was a trap answer because I thought the move from the ancient Greek play to ancient Greek society is too much of a stretch. I ended up choosing A.
What makes the assumption in A worse than D?
The only thing I can say is that D is textually supported but A is not. If we look at the nature of the inference itself, we KNOW from the text that the actor read silently. Hence at least the basis for the inference is there in the text. With A, whether the companion was illiterate or not is unclear. We DON'T KNOW that based on the text.
I think the assumption in D is terrible; but the only distinguishing factor between A and D is that the basis for inference is supported textually for D, but not for A.
In the end they are testing whether we can draw inferences that are textually supported. I am still frustrated with this Q, but that's the lesson I took away: when both answers require terrible assumptions, what is supported textually?
I went with A because it was the only answer that I felt stayed in scope, and was slightly relevant. I saw a clear flaw with A, but I thought it was a trick to discourage me from answering it. After taking PT 82, I saw a handful of credited responses that involved flawed reasoning (e.g. S4.LR1) and were justified as correct because they were the best of the worst.