Logical Reasoning

PT107 · S3 · Q12 Music critic: Some people argue

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

Start practicing free

Music critic: Some people argue that, unlike certain works of Handel, which set to music familiar religious texts, the organ symphonies of Louis Vierne are not religious music.

Conclusion

Quite the contrary.

rephrase: Vierne's organ symphonies are religious music.

Evidence

Hearing them in Notre Dame demonstrates that they are divinely inspired.

Evaluate

Haha, sorry, what? I'm not sure I even understand what argument the critic is trying to make.

How would we prove that a certain symphony qualifies as "religious music"?

In the context of the first sentence, it sounds like that would mean . There are probably other ways, too, like "the lyrics are about professing one's faith" or

But the critic is just saying that music is divinely inspired. If something is inspired by God, does that make it religious music?

God inspires athletes to perform at the top of their game, according to post-game interviews where the athlete gives all credit to big man upstairs. Does that mean that those athletic performances were religious performances?

The critic also seems to be arguing, .

If by that we mean, , then I'm on board. But if you mean, , then that doesn't make it religious.

Goal

Let's look for an answer critiquing either/both of the ways that the author is trying to justify calling these symphonies religious: if it's divinely inspired, it's religious? if you can hear it in a cathedral, it's religious?

12.

The music critic's reasoning is vulnerable to criticism on the ground that it

  1. takes for granted that all

    Bad Assumption

    "Takes for granted" = necessary assumption All = conditional When we see conditionals on Necessary Assumption, we might just intuitively hear that they are Too Strong, but the safer play is to mentally diagram them and ask yourself whether the argument made that reasoning move. This is saying, "If religious, then inspiring". Does that feel like a Premise to Conclusion move the author made? Nope, it's reversed. The premise was "divinely inspired", the conclusion was "religious". So it would need to be "all (divinely) inspired music is religious".

    10% picked this

  2. Correct

    confuses two different meanings of

    Why this is right

    This is the famous Equivocation flaw, which is often seen in answers but rarely is the issue. Can we justify it in this case? Is religious music being used in two different ways? Sure, the original sense was whether it's literally religion set to music, whether a composer took a familiar religious text and added chords/melodies. Essentially, whether you'd file it under the genre of 'religious music'. The sense of 'religious' that the author uses in her evidence is stuff like - inspired by God (a religious figure) - heard in a cathedral (a religious setting) I could argue that if you put on Adele's "Someone Like You" as you stroll through Notre Dame, you'll feel that it was divinely inspired, but that doesn't mean we would classify that song under the genre of religious music.

    Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    58% picked this

  3. overlooks the possibility that some

    Bad Objection

    Since it starts with "fails to consider / overlooks possibility" we'll try it on as a weakener. Can we say, "Hey author, some organ music isn't divinely inspired!" No. The author would be like, "Sure, I agree. I never said all organ music was divinely inspired. I just said that Vierne's organ music was divinely inspired." It's very hard to weaken an author with a weak-sauce claim like "some things aren't X" because it only hurts the author if they had committed to the unlikely claim that "all things are X".

    22% picked this

  4. confuses two different meanings of

    Bad Description

    Another equivocation answer? Is this to hide the fact that, for once, the correct answer is Equivocation? "Symphonies" is used consistently throughout the argument. Both speakers refer to Vierne's organ symphonies as instrumental musical works.

    1% picked this

  5. takes for granted that all

    Bad Assumption

    The author is only arguing that Vierne's organ symphonies are religious music. She never committed to the extreme idea that all organ symphonies are religious music.

    8% 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