LSAT 108 – Section 3 – Question 08

LSAT 108 - Section 3 - Question 08

February 2000

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 0:58

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question QuickView	Type	Tags	Answer Choices	Curve	Question Difficulty	Psg/Game/S Difficulty	Explanation
PT108 S3 Q08	+LR	Main conclusion or main point +MC	A 85% 167 B 1% 144 C 12% 161 D 1% 153 E 1% 156	131 144 157	+Medium	147.273 +SubsectionMedium

A metaphor is the application of a word or phrase to something to which it does not literally apply in order to emphasize or indicate a similarity between that to which it would ordinarily apply and that to which it is—nonliterally—being applied. Some extremists claim that all uses of language are metaphorical. But this cannot be so, for unless some uses of words are literal, there can be no nonliteral uses of any words.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

The author claims it is impossible for all uses of language to be metaphorical, contrary to what “some extremists” believe. This is demonstrated logically: the author tells us that unless some uses of language are literal, no uses of language can be nonliteral. By the definition given, metaphor is a nonliteral use of language. Therefore, there must be literal uses of language.
P1. Any nonliteral uses → some literal uses;
P2. Metaphor is a nonliteral use;
Therefore, there must be some literal uses.

Identify Conclusion

The author’s conclusion is that it “cannot be so” that all uses of language are metaphorical.

It is not the case that all uses of language are metaphorical.

This is a good statement of the author’s conclusion. The argument is designed to prove that there must be some literal uses of language, and since metaphor is nonliteral, that means it’s impossible for all language use to be metaphorical.

Either all uses of words are literal or all uses of words are metaphorical.

This is not a claim the author makes. The argument takes for granted the existence of some nonliteral uses (metaphor) and attempts to prove that there must also be literal uses. It’s not all-or-nothing.

Nonliteral meaning is possible only if some uses of words employ their literal meanings.

This claim is not supported by anything else in the argument. It is used by the author in combination with affirming the sufficient condition (nonliteral use being possible) to conclude that literal uses must exist. This is a premise, not a conclusion.

Metaphors are nonliteral uses of language that can be used to suggest similarities between objects.

This claim is not supported by anything else in the argument. It affirms the sufficient condition of the conditional claim made by the author to bring us to the conclusion that literal uses of language must exist. In other words, this is a premise.

The ordinary meanings of words must be fixed by convention if the similarities between objects are to be representable by language.

The author never says this. The ordinary meanings of words play no part in this argument, which just focuses on the theoretical debate of whether language is 100% metaphor or not.

LSAT 108 – Section 3 – Question 08

LSAT 108 - Section 3 - Question 08

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 108 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel