Logical Reasoning

PT107 · S3 · Q20 Pieces of music consist of sounds

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

Pieces of music consist of sounds and silences presented to the listener in a temporal order.

Conclusion (Therefore)

Hearing music and viewing paintings are crucially different in at least this regard: hearing music has a temporal dimension but viewing a painting does not.

Evidence

Music consists of sounds and silences presented to the listener in a temporal order.

A painting is not presented one part at a time to the viewer, so there's no particular path the viewer's eye must follow in order to 'read' the painting.

Evaluate

Technically, the thus in the second sentence signals a subsidiary conclusion being drawn on the basis of the first half of the second sentence. On a Flaw question, we occasionally will be tested on that sort of reasoning moment, but it's exceedingly rare. Also, in this case, it's a very hard conclusion to disagree with. Can we really argue that

No, that seems undeniably true. So let's focus on the main conclusion, which is that music has a temporal dimension, whereas viewing a painting doesn't. We could fight that conclusion by arguing that "music doesn't have a temporal dimension", "viewing a painting does", or both.

But it seems hard to deny that music has a temporal dimension; it's literally defined as .

So let's focus on fighting the idea that "viewing a painting doesn't have any temporal dimension". The author is saying,

Still, couldn't I ask you, You would be like, "about 10 seconds; it was pears."

We can make the case that there is still a temporal experience to a painting.

Goal

Let's look for an answer arguing,

20.

The reasoning in the argument is flawed because

the argument does not allow
Not an Objection
Since this answer begins with fails to consider / ignores the possibility, we'll ask ourselves whether the idea that follows would Weaken. Can we say, "Hey, author -- viewing a painting does have a temporal dimension. After all, sometimes when you view a painting you get so immersed that you're no longer conscious of the passage of time"? No, because if someone is unconscious of the passage of time, then there isn't a temporal dimension to their experience.
6% picked this
the argument is based on
Not an Objection
This is true, but not a problem we have with this argument's logic. If the definition of music had been altered to include a mention of different styles of music, would that make it easier to believe that "viewing a painting does have a temporal dimension"? Of course not. Changing the definition of music would have nothing to do with whether or not viewing a painting has a temporal dimension. And changing the definition of music to include a mention of styles wouldn't change the fact that music is still presented to the listener in a temporal order (so it won't change the fact that music does have a temporal dimension).
2% picked this
the argument fails to bring
Not an Objection
This is true, but it's not a problem we have with this argument's logic. It doesn't represent any sort of objection to this conclusion. Pointing out things that music and painting do have in common (they're both art forms / they both have existed for thousands of years) wouldn't help us to argue that "viewing a painting does have a temporal dimension".
3% picked this
relying on the metaphor of
Not Circular Opposite Effect, if anything
The phrase "presupposes the truth of the conclusion" is code language for Circular Reasoning, one of the top 10 famous flaws. This answer is almost always wrong. Circular arguments are ones in which the premise restates the conclusion or requires that the conclusion is true. But in this case, using the metaphor "reading a painting" does not seem to be assuming that "painting has no temporal dimension". After all, doesn't reading have a temporal dimension? The words in a book are kind of presented one part at a time to the reader, whereas a painting is presented all at once. So the use of the metaphor "reading" is closer to undermining the author's conclusion than to assuming its truth.
18% picked this
Correct
the absence of a particular
Why this is right
We were looking for an answer to convey that, "Even though there's no particular path your eye must follow, you do still spend some amount of time looking at a painting, so it does still have a temporal dimension." That's what this answer is getting at. The answer is structured as an objection that reads, "X does not entail Y". We would match that up with the concept of, "the Evidence does not entail/imply/prove the Conclusion". Was the evidence saying that "there is an absence of any particular path that the eye must follow"? Yes! It said "there is no particular path the viewer's eye must follow". Was the conclusion saying or assuming that "the eye follows no path"? Yes, implicitly. The author is thinking that a painting happens 'all at once'. That's why it has no temporal dimension. If the author thought that viewing a painting had a path, then he'd have to admit it has a temporal dimension. Moving through a path always has a temporal dimension. This answer sort of implies our objection. "Yes, author, when I look at a painting, there isn't a standardized path I have to follow. But I do still follow some path, which takes time. My eyes might start in the center and drift out. They might start at one face and then move to another. I am still taking my eyes along a visual path of my choosing. Thus, viewing a painting does still have a temporal dimension."
Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
70% 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