LSAT 113 – Section 3 – Question 18

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:40

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
PT113 S3 Q18
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Quantifier +Quant
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
4%
160
B
5%
159
C
78%
167
D
12%
161
E
1%
161
141
152
163
+Medium 146.265 +SubsectionMedium

Not all works of art represent something, but some do, and their doing so is relevant to our aesthetic experience of them; representation is therefore an aesthetically relevant property. Whether a work of art possesses this property is dependent upon context. Yet there are no clear criteria for determining whether context-dependent properties are present in an object, so there cannot be any clear criteria for determining whether an object qualifies as art.

Summarize Argument
Our argument concludes that there are no guidelines for defining objects as art. It supports that conclusion by identifying an attribute called representation, which is present in some art and dependent upon the art’s context. The argument then says there are no guidelines for determining aspects of art that rely on context (including representation), which the argument then stretches into the conclusion that there are no guidelines for defining art.

Identify and Describe Flaw
What if determining whether or not an object has representation is not the only way to identify it as art? Our author never defined representation as a necessary aspect for art; in fact, they told us that only some art has it. They failed to exclude the possibility that other attributes are sufficient for calling something art.

A
because some works of art are nonrepresentational, there is no way of judging our aesthetic experience of them
Our conclusion depends on characteristics and relationships associated with representational art; because this AC deals with nonrepresentational art, it goes outside the scope of our argument and does not correctly identify a flaw.
B
an object may have some aesthetic properties and not be a work of art
Irrelevant. Similarly to A, this AC goes outside the scope of our argument—we’re dealing with one specific aesthetic property and things that are art, not with other properties or non-art things.
C
aesthetically relevant properties other than representation can determine whether an object is a work of art
This addresses our argument’s underlying assumption. If aesthetically relevant properties other than representation can qualify something as art, our author’s argument is moot.
D
some works of art may have properties that are not relevant to our aesthetic experience of them
This is consistent with the argument and does not impact the validity of its conclusion. Properties like weight or smell probably don’t impact an artwork's aesthetic. The truth of this statement has nothing to do with our conclusion and does not make its logic flawed.
E
some objects that represent things other than themselves are not works of art
Similarly to A and B, this AC reaches outside the scope of our argument. The stimulus focuses on things that are art and have context-dependent properties. If something is not art, that does not impact the strength of the conclusion.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

Leave a Reply