LSAT 111 – Section 4 – Question 25

LSAT 111 - Section 4 - Question 25

October 2001

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:10

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
PT111 S4 Q25
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
A
74%
166
B
2%
156
C
6%
159
D
10%
162
E
8%
161
140
153
166
 +Harder 144.86 +SubsectionEasier

J.Y.’s explanation

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

Zachary: The term “fresco” refers to paint that has been applied to wet plaster. Once dried, a fresco indelibly preserves the paint that a painter has applied in this way. Unfortunately, additions known to have been made by later painters have obscured the original fresco work done by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel. Therefore, in order to restore Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel paintings to the appearance that Michelangelo intended them to have, everything except the original fresco work must be stripped away.

Stephen: But it was extremely common for painters of Michelangelo’s era to add painted details to their own fresco work after the frescos had dried.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
In response to Zachary’s claim that everything except the original fresco work must be stripped away in order to restore the Sistine Chapel to the appearance Michelangelo intended, Stephen points out that it is common for painters of that era to add painted details to their own fresco work after the frescos dried.

Describe Method of Reasoning
Stephen counters the position held by Zachary. He does this by pointing out an assumption that underlies Zachary’s argument. If it was common for painters of Michelangelo’s era to add details to fresco works after they have dried, then it may be that Michelangelo himself made the additions to the fresco work in the Sistine Chapel. If this is true, then it may not be necessary to strip away everything but the original fresco work as Zachary claims.

A
calling into question an assumption on which Zachary’s conclusion depends
The assumption Zachary’s conclusion depends on is the assumption that the additions made to the fresco work were not done by Michelangelo himself.
B
challenging the definition of a key term in Zachary’s argument
Stephen does not challenge the definition of any key terms. He does not dispute what counts as fresco work, etc.
C
drawing a conclusion other than the one that Zachary reaches
Stephen does not draw any conclusion. He provides additional information meant to counter an assumption that Zachary’s argument relies on.
D
denying the truth of one of the stated premises of Zachary’s argument
Stephen does not deny whether any later painters may have obscured Michelangelo’s original fresco work. Instead, he suggests that it is possible some of this later work was done by Michelangelo himself.
E
demonstrating that Zachary’s conclusion is not consistent with the premises he uses to support it
Zachary’s argument is not self-contradictory. We cannot say that an argument is self-contradictory because the argument relies on an assumption.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 111 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply