LSAT 153 – Section 3 – Question 22

LSAT 153 - Section 3 - Question 22

June 2019

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

Target time: 1:24

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
PT153 S3 Q22	+LR	Point at issue: disagree +Disagr Conditional Reasoning +CondR Value Judgment +ValJudg	A 1% 154 B 30% 159 C 57% 163 D 2% 152 E 11% 159	144 158 172	+Harder	146.755 +SubsectionMedium

Laurie: In a democracy, public art should bring people together either by expressing a consensus on a subject or by helping people to reconcile their differences and to recognize that no single opinion is definitive. Since contemporary public art creates only acrimony, it has failed in its task.

Elsa: If people hold radically different opinions, public art should emphasize that. No art form can do the impossible, which is what you are asking for.

Speaker 1 Summary

Laurie concludes that contemporary public art has failed to achieve its purpose. Its purpose in a democracy is to express a consensus on a subject or to help people reconcile their differences. Contemporary public art only creates bitterness among people.

Speaker 2 Summary

Elsa has a different take on what public art should do. She thinks it should emphasize radically different opinions. Elsa asserts that it’s impossible for art to either express a consensus on a subject or to help people to reconcile their differences.

Objective

We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree on what public art should do. Laurie thinks it should help bring people together. Elsa thinks it should emphasize different opinions.

what types of public art are most characteristic of contemporary democracies

Neither speaker has an opinion. They don’t discuss different types of public art or what’s most common in a democracy.

whether it is possible in a democracy to create public art that people with radically different opinions can enjoy and support

Neither speaker has an opinion. Although both speakers discuss whether art can bring people together, they don’t discuss whether people with different opinion can enjoy or support public art. Enjoyment of art is different from art’s ability to bring people together.

what the criterion of success for public art in a democracy should be

This is a point of disagreement. Laurie thinks public art should bring people together. Elsa thinks public art should emphasize radically different opinions, and that it’s impossible for public art to bring people together.

whether contemporary public art creates only acrimony

Elsa has no opinion on this. She doesn’t discuss whether public art creates acrimony or other feelings.

whether it is wise for contemporary public art to help achieve a consensus on a subject

Laurie doesn’t have an opinion. She says public art should help bring people together by expressing a consensus or helping people to see that no opinion is definitive. But this isn’t the same as helping people to achieve a consensus.

LSAT 153 – Section 3 – Question 22

LSAT 153 - Section 3 - Question 22

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

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 153 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Leave a Reply Cancel