Surrealist: Many artists mistakenly think that models need be taken only from outside the psyche. Although human sensibility can confer beauty upon even the most vulgar external objects, using the power of artistic representation solely to preserve and reinforce objects that would exist even without artists is an ironic waste.Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the surrealist's argument?
Answer(s): A
In this one we have to determine the conclusion, so we'll look to identify the components of the argument. Well, we shouldn't expect anything uttered by a surrealist to be particularly straightforward, and this is no exception -- the argument is fairly abstract conceptually, but if you follow the structure it's not that bad. The first sentence tells us that it's a mistake to think that artists should use only models from outside the psyche. If the next sentence tells us why this is a mistake, then that means the first sentence is the conclusion. And indeed, the second sentence does provide that evidence:While artists can do something with even the worst external objects (and hopefully you understood "external objects" as synonymous with "models...outside the psyche"), using artistic talent only on such external objects is a waste.
Harrold Foods is attempting to dominate the soft-drink market by promoting "Hero," its most popular carbonated drink product, with a costly new advertising campaign. But survey results show that, in the opinion of 72 percent of all consumers, "Hero" already dominates the market. Since any product with more than 50 percent of the sales in a market is, by definition, dominant in that market, Harrold Foods dominates the market now and need only maintain its current market share in order to continue to do so.The argument commits which one of the following errors in reasoning?
Answer(s): D
A Logical Flaw question is up next, and this one contains more familiar concepts than the previous surrealist manifesto on art. Harrold Foods is sinking tons of money into ads for its Hero drink in order to dominate the market, but a survey shows that 72% of all consumers already think Hero's on top. The author then asserts that Harrold is in fact dominant in the market, with dominance defined as having more than 50% market share. It's hard to miss the scope shift inherent in this reasoning: In making that claim, the author evidently equates "72% of people think Hero is dominant" with "Herohas72% of sales in the market." But these aren't the same things; if only market share were that easy!
Theoretically, analog systems are superior to digital systems. A signal in a pure analog system can be infinitely detailed, while digital systems cannot produce signals that are more precise than their digital units. With this theoretical advantage there is a practical disadvantage, however. Since there is no limit on the potential detail of the signal, the duplication of an analog representation allows tiny variations from the original, which are errors. These errors tend to accumulate as signals are duplicated, until this "noise" obliterates the information embodied in the original signal.The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of the following?
Answer(s): E
We see an Inference stem and a lot of text, so we should gear our attack on the stimulus accordingly, scoping out the more concrete facts and looking to interpret and combine as we go. In theory, we're told, analog systems trump digitalones, and sentence 2 tells us one way that's so--a difference in the detail and precision of their respective signals. But there's a very real downside to this theoretical advantage: The detail possible in an analog signal allow for errors to creep in during duplication, and the resultant noise can eventually drown out the original signal. There's nothing really obvious in the way of connections here, so we'll have to rely on a careful evaluation of the choices.
Psychologist: Doctors should never prescribe sedatives for people with insomnia. Most cases of insomnia that psychologists treat are known to be caused by psychological stress. This suggests that insomniacs do not need drugs that alter their biochemistry, but rather need psychotherapy to help them alleviate the stress causing their insomnia.Each of the following describes a flaw in the psychologist's reasoning EXCEPT:
One has to wonder if the psychologist went out of his way to construct such a lousy argument. After all, it's not easy to cram four distinct flaws into a three-sentence pronouncement, but the psychologists somehow manages to do just that. Sedatives should never be prescribed for insomnia because most cases of insomnia that psychologists treat are caused by stress. Well, there's a first possible flaw, the familiar non-representative sample: The psychologist can't form a general conclusion about how insomnia shouldn't be treated based only on evidence concerning people treated by psychologists; what about those who aren't? E. speaks directly to this issue and can therefore be eliminated. Furthermore, the fact that most cases of insomnia are caused by stress doesn't mean that all are, and so perhaps for the non-stress related cases sedatives can be helpful. So again the "never prescribe sedatives" recommendation overreaches, and B. describes this flaw perfectly. Now for the rest of the argument: Because these cases treated by psychologists are mostly caused by stress, insomniacs don't need drugs, but rather psychotherapy to alleviate stress. This sounds a bit self-serving and suspect, but if nothing specific hits you, then it's time to check out the remaining choices.
Numerous paintings and engravings representing warfare can be found in remains of all civilizations going back to and including the Neolithic period, when agriculture was first developed. However, no paintings or engravings of warfare are found dating from before the Neolithic period. Therefore, warfare must have first developed as a result of the transition to an agricultural society.Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
Answer(s): C
A standard Assumption stem, so the standard methods apply: Look for the gap between the evidence and conclusion and/or elements that need to be connected in order for the argument to work. Here we have a causal argument, and a fairly tenuous one at that--did you notice the scope shift? War is represented in the paintings and engravings of all civilizations back to and including the Neolithic period, the first period with agriculture, but not before that. Therefore, war resulted from the ransition to agriculture. So what's the shift? Look closely at how warfare is treated in the argument: In the evidence, we're old of representations of warfare, which the author uses to form a conclusion about when warfare itself actually arose. Well, in order for this to work, the author must assume that warfare did not appear on the scene before paintings and engravings it. If warfare actually appeared before representations of it, that would sever the connection the author seeks to establish between the advent of agriculture and the advent of war. So C. must be assumed in order for this argument to stand.
Post your Comments and Discuss Test Prep LSAT Test exam prep with other Community members:
Our website is free, but we have to fight against AI bots and content theft. We're sorry for the inconvenience caused by these security measures. You can access the rest of the LSAT Test content, but please register or login to continue.