LSAT 135 – Section 4 – Question 25

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

Request new explanation

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
PT135 S4 Q25
+LR
Point at issue: disagree +Disagr
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
4%
158
B
2%
156
C
85%
166
D
6%
157
E
4%
158
142
150
159
+Medium 147.853 +SubsectionMedium

Lutsina: Because futuristic science fiction does not need to represent current social realities, its writers can envisage radically new social arrangements. Thus it has the potential to be a richer source of social criticism than is conventional fiction.

Priscilla: That futuristic science fiction writers more skillfully envisage radically new technologies than new social arrangements shows how writers’ imaginations are constrained by current realities. Because of this limitation, the most effective social criticism results from faithfully presenting the current social realities for critical examination, as happens in conventional fiction.

Speaker 1 Summary
Lutsina concludes that futuristic sci-fi has the potential to be a richer source of social criticism than conventional fiction. This is because futuristic sci-fi writers can write about new social arrangements, since they don’t have to represent current social realities.

Speaker 2 Summary
Priscilla concludes that the most effective social criticism results from accurately presenting current social realities, as conventional fiction does. This view is based on the claim that futuristic sci-fi writers are better at imagining new technologies than they are at imagining new social realities. This shows that writers’ imaginations are constrained by current realities.

Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree about whether sci-fi or conventional fiction are the best at social criticism.

A
some science fiction writers have succeeded in envisaging convincing, radically new social arrangements
Neither expresses an opinion. Lutsina only speaks about potential effectiveness, not about actual successes in writing social criticism. Priscilla doesn’t say anything about successful sci-fi writers.
B
writers of conventional fiction are more skillful than are writers of futuristic science fiction
Neither expresses an opinion. Lutsina doesn’t discuss skill. Priscilla refers to skill at imagining technology and social arrangements, but doesn’t refer to writing skill. Neither compares writing skill among sci-fi and conventional writers.
C
futuristic science fiction has more promise as a source of social criticism than does conventional fiction
This is a point of disagreement. Lutsina thinks sci-fi does hold more promise. Priscilla thinks the most effective social criticism happens in conventional fiction (and therefore not in sci-fi).
D
envisaging radically new technologies rather than radically new social arrangements is a shortcoming of futuristic science fiction
Lutsina doesn’t express an opinion about this. She refers only to envisaging new social arrangements, but says nothing about new technologies.
E
criticism of current social arrangements is not effective when those arrangements are contrasted with radically different ones
Neither has an opinion. To Lutsina, imagining new arrangements can lead to better criticism, but that doesn’t mean anything is required to be effective. To Priscilla, current arrangements are important, but that doesn’t mean comparisons to other arrangements are required.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

Leave a Reply