LSAT 137 – Section 2 – Question 16

LSAT 137 - Section 2 - Question 16

October 2012

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:05

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
PT137 S2 Q16
+LR
Point at issue: disagree +Disagr
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
9%
161
B
2%
157
C
66%
165
D
11%
159
E
12%
159
144
155
167
 +Harder 146.731 +SubsectionMedium

Marife: That was a bad movie because, by not providing viewers with all the information necessary for solving the murder, it violated a requirement of murder mysteries.

Nguyen: But the filmmaker wanted viewers to focus on the complex relationship between the chief detective and her assistant. The murder just provided the context in which the relationship developed, and should not be taken as a defining characteristic of the film.

Speaker 1 Summary
Marife claims that a particular movie was bad. Why? Because it didn’t give viewers all the necessary clues to solve the murder, and therefore broke a rule of murder mysteries. Presumably, if a murder mystery film breaks this rule, that makes it a bad movie.

Speaker 2 Summary
Nguyen’s claims support the unstated conclusion that breaking this rule is not grounds to call this movie bad. Why not? Because the filmmaker was actually focusing on the relationship between the detective and her assistant. Plus, the murder was just context for this relationship. Presumably, that means the film isn’t really a murder mystery movie.

Objective
We want to find a disagreement between the speakers. They disagree about whether a film is truly a murder mystery.

A
whether the movie was a bad one
Marife agrees that this is the case, but Nguyen never disagrees. Nguyen’s issue is with the rule Marife uses to conclude that the movie was bad, not necessarily with the conclusion itself.
B
whether the relationship between the chief detective and her assistant was an important part of the movie
Nguyen agrees that this is true, but Marife never offers an opinion. Marife doesn’t discuss the relationship between the chief detective and her assistant at all.
C
whether the movie should be classified as a murder mystery
Marife agrees but Nguyen disagrees, so this is their disagreement. Marife applies a rule about murder mysteries to this movie, indicating that it is indeed a murder mystery. Nguyen says there are more important aspects of the film, making it not a murder mystery.
D
the appropriateness of trying to find criteria that all mystery movies must meet
Neither speaker really discusses this. Marife proposes a rule that applies to all murder mysteries, which may indicate that broad criteria like this are appropriate, but it’s never directly stated. Nguyen doesn’t talk about universal mystery requirements at all.
E
whether the filmmaker wanted viewers to be able to solve the murder
Both speakers likely agree that the filmmaker did not want this. Marife’s complaint is that the filmmaker made it impossible for viewers to solve the murder, while Nguyen points out that the filmmaker actually just wanted to focus on a relationship in the film.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 137 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply