LSAT 137 – Section 4 – Question 22

LSAT 137 - Section 4 - Question 22

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: 1:45

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 S4 Q22
+LR
Argument part +AP
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
A
8%
157
B
1%
153
C
7%
158
D
7%
158
E
77%
165
145
153
161
 +Harder 146.883 +SubsectionMedium

Linguist: One group of art critics claims that postimpressionist paintings are not really art and so should be neither studied nor displayed. Another group of critics disagrees, insisting that these paintings are works of art. But since the second group grants that there are paintings that are not works of art and should therefore be ignored in the manner suggested by the first group, their disagreement is not over the meaning of the word “art.”

Summarize Argument
The linguist concludes that the two groups of critics aren’t disagreeing over what “art” means. This is because the two groups agree that there are paintings that really aren’t “art,” and therefore don’t merit serious attention. Their disagreement is instead over the postimpressionist paintings at hand.

Identify Argument Part
The referenced text supports the claim that the two groups aren’t disagreeing over the word “art.” Since both groups grant that some paintings aren’t art, they must agree that art isn’t all-encompassing. The disagreement must therefore be about something else.

A
It is a contention that the argument purports to show is the main point of disagreement between the two groups of critics mentioned.
The linguist states that the two groups don’t disagree over the idea that some paintings aren’t art. The second group, like the first, believes some paintings should be dismissed as non-art.
B
It is cited as a commonly accepted reason for accepting a hypothesis for which the argument offers independent evidence.
There’s nothing about “commonly accepted” in this argument. Nor is there any independent evidence for the hypothesis that the two groups don’t disagree over the meaning of “art.”
C
It is a claim whose acceptance by critics who differ on other issues is cited by the argument as evidence of its truth.
The linguist isn’t arguing that the referenced text is actually true. He’s simply pointing out that the two groups agree that not all paintings are works of art.
D
It is a claim about the nature of art that according to the argument accounts for disputes that only appear to concern the aesthetic merits of certain types of paintings.
This answer choice is incredibly convoluted. Luckily, the linguist says nothing about aesthetic merits. He also doesn’t generalize about the types of disputes that generally ensue from claims about the nature of art. We can eliminate.
E
It is a claim whose acceptance by both of the two disputing parties is cited as evidence for a conclusion the argument draws about the disagreement.
The referenced text is evidence that both parties accept that art has clear limits, hence why some paintings can be ignored. From there, the linguist concludes that the two disputing parties aren’t disagreeing over the meaning of the word “art.”

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