Logical Reasoning

PT1 · S3 · Q17 It is the mark of a superior conductor

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one
Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step
81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

It is the mark of a superior conductor that he or she has the authority to insist, even with a top orchestra, that rehearsal work must be intensified.

Position

Superior conductors have the authority to insist on intensified rehearsal work, even with a top orchestra. And they can't simply claim authority; they must earn it by gaining the orchestra’s respect for their artistic interpretations.

Evaluate

The question stem identifies this stimulus as a Position rather than argument/reasoning. So we don't have to force it into an argument framework if that feels unnatural. It doesn't seem like the 2nd sentence really supports the 1st one as much as it just elaborates on the details of the 1st one.

Goal

Since this doesn't have an argument structure, it's a little hard to anticipate what the author is assuming (we don't have an "If Premise, then Conclusion" type of reasoning move to scrutinize).

So we'll just have to look for some answer that feels implied by the stimulus.

17.

In taking the position outlined, the author presupposes which one of the following?

Superior conductors devise different interpretations
Irrelevant Comparison
It doesn't make a difference to this position whether superior conducts use the same interpretation with different orchestras or whether they vary it for each ensemble. All the author cares about is that the conductor earns the respect of each ensemble for whatever artistic interpretation he/she is shooting for.
13% picked this
Superior conductors are perfectionists who
Too Strong: never / any
This answer is insanely strong. They're never satisfied with any performance? Negating this would mean, "There has been at least one time in history when a superior conductor was satisfied with a performance." That negation wouldn't weaken the position at all, so this answer clearly doesn't need to be assumed.
2% picked this
Top orchestras are always ready
Too Strong: always
This answer is way too strong and doesn't even limit itself to superior conductors. It's saying for any conductor, if they think additional rehearsals are necessary, then a top orchestra will agree 100% of the time. If we negate this, we're saying, "wellll .... there is at least one case in which a conductor considers additional rehearsals necessary but a top orchestra isn't ready to put in additional work". That doesn't conflict with the author's position at all, so this doesn't need to be assumed.
13% picked this
Correct
Top orchestras can appreciate the
Why this is right
The wording here is attractively weak. If we negate it, we'll get a strong idea. Does it weaken for us to say to the author "Hey, buddy, top orchestras cannot appreciate the merit of an interpretation until they've brought it to full realization"? Yes! The author is saying that a top conductor would get the orchestra to apply more effort to rehearsals by earning their respect with the interpretation he/she is pursuing. But that would be an impossible process if orchestras can't evaluate whether they like/respect the interpretation they're pursuing until it's already fully realized (essentially, until after all the rehearsals are done). This answer is essentially stating something that would need to be true for the author's portrayal to be a reality. The superior conductor would first convince the orchestra of the merits of his/her interpretation, which would then convince the orchestra to invest more effort in rehearsals, which would then eventually lead to the interpretation being fully realized. For that to work, the orchestra would have to be able to believe in the end product when they're still at a more-beginning stage in the rehearsal process.
Skill tested: Necessary Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
59% picked this
Even top orchestras are not
Irrelevant Quality
This is lovably weak, but the author doesn't care if top orchestras are always led by superior conductors or not always led by superior conductors. The author's position describes what a superior conductor's relationship with a top orchestra would look like, but she is never saying that some top orchestras are led by non-superior conductors (as this answer is saying). If we negated this answer, it wouldn't weaken the author's position to say "top orchestras are always led by superior conductors".
13% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free