LSAT 158 – Section 2 – Question 24

LSAT 158 - Section 2 - Question 24

May 2020

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:18

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
PT158 S2 Q24
+LR
Sufficient assumption +SA
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
19%
156
B
72%
163
C
3%
150
D
3%
156
E
3%
153
141
151
161
 +Medium 146.031 +SubsectionMedium

Filmmaker: Many people feel that independent films have more integrity as works of art than films produced by major studios, since independent films are typically less conventional than major studio films. However, like major studios, all independent filmmakers need to make profits on their films, and this affects the artistic decisions made in creating most independent films. Thus, most independent films do not have absolute integrity as works of art.

Summary
The author concludes that most independent films don’t have absolute integrity as works of art. Why?
Because independent filmmakers need to make profits, which influences the artistic decisions made in creating most independent films.

Missing Connection
The conclusion introduces a new concept — lack of absolute integrity as works of art. The premise doesn’t say what implies that something has a lack of absolute integrity as a work of art. So, at a minimum, the correct answer must establish what’s required in order to have absolute integrity as a work of art.
To go further, we can anticipate a more specific connection between the premise and conclusion. The premise tells us that most independent films involve artistic decisions that are influenced by the need for profits. To make the argument valid, we want to show that this quality — having artistic decisions influenced by the need for profits — implies a lack of absolute integrity as an artwork.

A
A creation has absolute integrity as a work of art if the artistic decisions made in creating it were unaffected by the need to make profits.
(A) is the sufficiency/necessity confused version of what we want. We want to establish that if the decisions ARE affected by need for profits, then the creation does NOT have absolute integrity. But (A) tells us that if the decisions are NOT affected, the creation DOES have absolute integrity.
B
If any of the artistic decisions made in creating something were affected by the need to make profits, then that creation does not have absolute integrity as a work of art.
(B) connects the premise to the conclusion. We know most ind. films involve art decisions affected by need for profits. With (B), we can conclude that these films don’t have absolute integrity as works of art.
C
The creations of individuals have more integrity as works of art, on average, than those of groups.
(C) doesn’t establish when something lacks absolute integrity as a work of art. We want to connect the feature of having your decisions affected by need for profits to the feature of lacking absolute integrity as a work of art. (C) doesn’t do this.
D
The unconventionality of a creation has no bearing on its integrity as a work of art.
(D) doesn’t establish when something lacks absolute integrity as a work of art. We want to connect the feature of having your decisions affected by need for profits to the feature of lacking absolute integrity as a work of art. (D) doesn’t do this.
E
A creation has no integrity as a work of art unless the artistic decisions made in creating it were unaffected by views about what is conventional.
We know from the stimulus that ind. films are typically less conventional than major films. But we don’t know that any of the artistic decisions in making ind. films were affected by views about what is conventional. So (E) doesn’t impact the argument.

This is an SA question.

The argument opens with OPA. “Many people” believe that independent films have more integrity as work than major studio productions because indies are less conventional. Okay, great. That’s OPA.

The author (filmmaker) transitions to her argument with “however.” The premise is that indie filmmakers’ need to make a profit affects their artistic decisions. The conclusion is that indie films do not have absolute artistic integrity.

This looks a lot like a PSA question. The premise can be represented as P and the conclusion as C. We need to build a P→C bridge. If profit affects artistic decisions, then there is no absolute artistic integrity. Or something like that.

Correct Answer Choice (B) says if any of the artistic decisions made in creating something were affected by the need to make profits, then that creation does not have absolute integrity as a work of art. That works as a P→C bridge. As is often the case, the correct answer covers more than what we need. (B) covers any artistic decision, not just the ones involved in filmmaking. But that’s fine.

Answer Choice (A) can be eliminated on its logic alone. You can either notice that the sufficient condition here is “artistic decision unaffected by profit needs” or notice that the necessary condition here is “creation has absolute artistic integrity.” Both are wrong. The sufficient condition is supposed to be P, not /P. The necessary condition is supposed to be C, not /C. This is a recurring type of wrong answer for SA and PSA questions. It’s sufficiency-necessity confusion.

Answer Choice (C) can be eliminated by noticing that it’s a comparative statement. We need a logically tight bridge. (C) says that individual creations tend to have more artistic integrity than group creations. Okay, but the argument isn’t concerned with comparing “individual creations” to “group creations.” Only OPA talks about indie films in comparison to major studio productions. No doubt major studio productions are “group creations.” But don’t assume that indie films are “individual creations.” They probably involve fewer people but they probably still involve more than one person.

Answer Choice (D) precludes something as having an effect on artistic integrity. (D) precludes the “unconventionality” of a creation as having an effect on artistic integrity. Okay, now what? The argument is assuming that profit requirements have an effect on artistic integrity. More specifically, it assumes that the effect is that it taints artistic integrity.

Answer Choice (E) is a conditional constructed with “unless.” Translated to an “if...then...” construction, we get, “If artistic decisions were affected by views about what is conventional, then no artistic integrity.” The problem here is that the premises in the argument do not trigger the sufficient condition. All we know about indie filmmakers is that they need to make a profit, which affects their artistic decisions. It’s a further assumption that the need to make a profit amounts to a “view about what is conventional.” The necessary condition in (E) is more than what’s needed, but that’s not a problem for SA answers. If we could have triggered the sufficient condition here, then we could have drawn the conclusion that a creation has no artistic integrity. That would have necessarily implied that it doesn’t have absolute artistic integrity.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 158 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply