LSAT 154 – Section 2 – Question 02

LSAT 154 - Section 2 - Question 02

September 2017

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:02

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
PT154 S2 Q02
+LR
Sufficient assumption +SA
Conditional Reasoning +CondR
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
1%
148
B
86%
163
C
10%
153
D
2%
151
E
1%
151
136
144
152
 +Medium 144.659 +SubsectionEasier

The poet E. E. Cummings stood for the individual human being against regimentation and standardization of any sort. Yet in doing so Cummings stood against something essential to the work he did, since metaphor presupposes literal language, and literal language essentially involves regimentation.

Summary
The conclusion is that EE Cummings stood against something essential to his own work. Why?
First, EE Cummings stood for the individual human against regimentation and standardization.
Second, metaphor requires literal language, which in turn requires regimentation.

Missing Connection
We’re trying to prove that EE Cummings stood against something essential in his own work. The only thing we know EE Cummings stood for is being against regimentation and standardization. So something in EE Cummings’ work must involve or otherwise support regimentation or standardization.
We have premises that establish metaphor involves regimentation. But what does this have to do with EE Cummings? We don’t know. The author never explicitly stated that metaphor was essential to EE Cummings’ work. But if we can learn that it was essential to his work, that would establish that there’s a conflict between what EE Cummings stood for (being against regimentation) and something essential in his work (metaphor, which involves regimentation).

A
Not all poets use metaphor.
This doesn’t tell us anything about EE Cummings work. So we have no further basis for saying that EE Cummings stood against something essential to his work.
B
Metaphor was essential to E. E. Cummings’s work.
Metaphor presupposes (or in other words, requires) literal language, which involves regimentation. Since EE Cummings stood against regimentation, (E) establishes that he stood against something essential in his work (regimentation).
C
There can be no literal language without metaphor.
This doesn’t tell us anything about EE Cummings work. So we have no further basis for saying that EE Cummings stood against something essential to his work.
D
Poetry cannot be regimented or standardized.
This doesn’t tell us anything about EE Cummings work. So we have no further basis for saying that EE Cummings stood against something essential to his work.
E
E. E. Cummings did not use literal language.
(E) doesn’t establish that metaphor was essential to EE Cummings’ work, because there could be nonliteral language that isn’t metaphor. So what, then, is the significance of not using literal language? Does this go against EE Cummings’ stance against regimentation and standardization? We don’t know.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 154 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply