LSAT 143 – Section 3 – Question 11

LSAT 143 - Section 3 - Question 11

June 2015

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:41

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
PT143 S3 Q11
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
A
2%
155
B
4%
159
C
6%
158
D
22%
161
E
67%
166
146
156
167
 +Harder 147.721 +SubsectionMedium

Literature professor: Critics charge that the work of C. F. Providence’s best-known follower, S. N. Sauk, lacks aesthetic merit because it employs Providence’s own uniquely potent system of symbolic motifs in the service of a political ideal that Providence—and, significantly, some of these critics as well—would reject. Granting that Sauk is more imitator than innovator, and that he maintained political views very different from those Providence maintained, it has yet to be shown that these facts make his writings any less subtly or powerfully crafted than those of his more esteemed mentor. So the critics’ argument should be rejected.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Critics argue that Sauk’s work doesn’t have aesthetic merit, because it uses certain symbolic motifs of an artist that Sauk followed, but to further a political ideal that that artist would disagree with. The author rejects the critics argument, because the critics haven’t shown that the use of the same symbolic motifs for a purpose that the artist would reject would decrease aesthetic merit of Sauk’s work.

Describe Method of Reasoning
The author criticizes the critics’ argument by pointing out that the critics’ premise, even if it’s true, doesn’t provide any support to the critics’ conclusion. The fact Sauk uses the same symbolic motifs hasn’t been shown to affect the aesthetic merit of Sauk’s work.

A
the claims made in support of this conclusion are inaccurate
The claim made in support of the critics’ conclusion is that Sauk’s work uses symbolic motifs in service of politics that are different from those of the person Sauk imitated. The author doesn’t disagree with this claim. He disagrees that this claim is relevant to the conclusion.
B
Sauk’s work has aesthetic merit
The author’s argument doesn’t rely on the grounds that Sauk’s work has aesthetic merit. It relies on the grounds that it hasn’t been shown that imitating symbolic motifs that the original artist would disagree with decreases aesthetic merit of a work.
C
these critics are motivated by antipathy toward Sauk’s political ideas
The author never alleges that the critics are motivated by antipathy. Although he acknowlges that the critics would reject Sauk’s politics, that doesn’t mean this difference of political opinion motivates the critics in their argument.
D
the claims made in support of this conclusion have not been shown to be correct
The claim made in support of the critics’ conclusion is that Sauk’s work uses symbolic motifs in service of politics that are different from those of the person Sauk imitated. The author concedes that this is true (line beginning “Granting...”).
E
the claims made in support of this conclusion have not been shown to be relevant to it
The author believes the fact Sauk imitated an artist who would disagree with Sauk’s politics hasn’t been shown to decrease aesthetic merit. Thus, it hasn’t been shown to be relevant to the critic’s conclusion that Sauk’s work lacks aesthetic merit.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 143 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply