A
Nothing qualifies as art unless it causes debate among experts.
B
If an object causes debate among experts, no expert can be certain whether that object qualifies as art.
C
The purchase of an object that fulfills the purpose of art should not be opposed.
D
Any object that fulfills the purpose of art qualifies as art.
E
The city art commission should purchase the edifice if it qualifies as art.
The question stem reads: Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the conclusion of the city councilperson's argument to be properly inferred? This is a Sufficient Assumption question.
The councilperson begins by stating that many residents oppose the city's proposal to purchase a stone edifice. The residents oppose the purchase because art critics are divided over whether the edifice qualifies as art. We then get the context indicator "but," indicating a turn to the author's argument. The councilperson claims that the purpose of art is to cause experts to debate ideas, including what counts as art. They then say, "Since the edifice has caused experts to debate about what constitutes art itself, it (the edifice) does qualify as art." The indicator "since" is usually attached to both a premise and a conclusion. So "the edifice has caused experts to debate" is a premise, and "the edifice does qualify as art" is our conclusion. Let's outline the argument:
P1: The purpose of art is to cause debate among experts
P2: The edifice has caused debate among experts
______________________________________________
C: The edifice qualifies as art.
We can make the inference P3 that the edifice has fulfilled the purpose of art since the edifice has caused debate among experts (which is the purpose of art). We now get
P1: The purpose of art is to cause debate among experts
P2: The edifice has caused debate among experts
P3 The edifice has fulfilled the purpose of art
______________________________________________
C: The edifice qualifies as art.
In the Core Curriculum, we discussed how ideas contained in the conclusion must also be contained in the premises. The councilperson's conclusion is that the edifice qualifies as art, but we have no premise to tell us what qualifies as art. So we need a conditional with "qualifies as art" in the necessary condition: ( _) -> qualifies as art. As a matter of "logic," any sufficient condition that is satisfied by the stimulus will complete the councilperson's argument. As a matter of what actually happens on the LSAT, the sufficient condition will usually be an inference we made using the premises. We made the inference that the edifice has fulfilled the purpose of art. So our most likely sufficient assumption will be:
P1: The purpose of art is to cause debate among experts
P2: The edifice has caused debate among experts
P3 The edifice has fulfilled the purpose of art
SA: fulfills the purpose of art -> qualifies as art
______________________________________________
C: The edifice qualifies as art.
I'll note that the sufficient condition does not have to be "fulfills the purpose of art," but we absolutely need "qualifies as art" in the necessary condition. We can screen the answer choices by asking ourselves: Does the AC have "qualifies as art" in the necessary? If yes, then Does sufficient get satisfied by the stimulus? Let's take a look at the AC's
Answer Choice (A) fails our test. Translated, we get: "qualifies as art -> causes debate." Here we have "qualifies as art" in the sufficient condition when we want it in the necessary condition.
Answer Choice (B) does not have the necessary condition we are looking for. You might think that (B) would contradict our conclusion. The sufficient condition is met, so we would get: "experts cannot be certain about whether the edifice qualifies as art." However, the fact that "experts cannot be certain about whether the edifice qualifies as art" does not affect whether or not the edifice actually qualifies as art. There is a distinction between what we think is true and what actually is true. In the past, people were not sure whether the Earth was the center of the universe. That did not mean the Earth was or was not the center of the universe. In any case, (B) is wrong. Don't pick it.
Answer Choice (C) is irrelevant. If you picked (C), you likely thought the city councilperson was advocating for the purchase of the edifice. However, we do not know his position on that matter. What we do know is that he thinks the edifice is art. The councilperson may think the edifice qualifies as art and that the city should not purchase the edifice because it is too expensive. (C) is an example of why it is so vital to separate the context from the argument.
Correct Answer Choice (D) is our prephase. The edifice fulfills the purpose of art; therefore, it qualifies as art. Pick it and move.
Answer Choice (E) is incorrect for the same reason that (C) is: they are irrelevant. Again, the councilperson's argument has nothing to do with whether or not the city should purchase the edifice, only whether or not the edifice qualifies as art.
A
To be an intriguing person, one must be able to inspire the perpetual curiosity of others.
B
If one constantly broadens one’s abilities and extends one’s intellectual reach, one will be able to inspire the perpetual curiosity of others.
C
If one’s mind becomes impossible to fully comprehend, one will always be a mystery to others.
D
To inspire the perpetual curiosity of others, one must constantly broaden one’s abilities and extend one’s intellectual reach.
E
If one constantly broadens one’s abilities and extends one’s intellectual reach, one will always have curiosity.
Most genetic research is funded exclusively by the government.
Genetic research that is not funded by the government is funded exclusively by corporations.
All genetic research is paid for by either corporations or the government, because genetic research requires funding from one of those sources.
All advances in genetic research are funded by either the government or corporations.
All ethical dilemmas arising from genetic research come from work that was funded by either the government or corporations.