LSAT 151 – Section 4 – Question 20

LSAT 151 - Section 4 - Question 20

September 2018

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:22

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
PT151 S4 Q20
+LR
+Exp
Sufficient assumption +SA
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
7%
156
B
7%
157
C
5%
152
D
3%
157
E
78%
164
144
151
159
 +Medium 145.196 +SubsectionEasier

According to a theory embraced by some contemporary musicians, music is simply a series of sounds, bereft of meaning. But these musicians, because they understand that their theory is radically nonconformist, encourage audience acceptance by prefacing their performances with explanations of their intentions. Thus, even their own music fails to conform to their theory.

Summary
The author concludes that for some contemporary musicians, their music possess meaning. This is supported by the observation that these musicians begin their performances with explanations of their intentions.

Missing Connection
The conclusion asserts that some musicians’ music has “meaning.” But we don’t have any premise that tells us when something has meaning. All we know is that some musicians explain their intentions before performing their music. To make the argument valid, then, we want to establish that the premise leads to the idea that the musicians’ music has meaning:
If musicians explain their intentions before performing music, that music possesses meaning.
Another way to phrase the same relationship:
If music does not possess meaning, then musicians will not explain their intentions before performing it.

A
The human ability to think symbolically and to invest anything with meaning makes it very difficult to create music that has no meaning.
Showing that it’s difficult to create music with no meaning does not establish that the musicians we’re talking about in the conclusion make music that has meaning. Maybe their music doesn’t have meaning, even though it would be difficult to make that kind of music.
B
It will be possible for musicians to create music that means nothing only when listeners are able to accept such a theory of music.
We don’t know whether listeners are able to accept a theory of music that allows for meaningless music. If they are, then it’s possible that musicians create music that means nothing.
C
The fact that music is distinguishable from a random series of sounds only when it has meaning makes music with meaning more appealing to audiences than music without meaning.
We want to show that certain musicians’ music has meaning. (C) simply tells us something about which kind of music appeals to audiences more. But it doesn’t tell us that the musicians’ music has meaning.
D
Music that opposes current popular conceptions of music is less likely to be enjoyed by audiences than is music that accords with such conceptions.
(D) doesn’t tell us anything about meaning. So it can’t establish that the certain musicians described in the conclusion make music with meaning.
E
Musicians whose music has no meaning do not preface their performances with explanations of their intentions.
We know the musicians referred to in the conclusion explain their intentions before performing their music. According to (E), then, their music must have some meaning. Because if their music did not have meaning, then they would not explain their intentions before performance.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 151 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply