Reading Comprehension

PT110 · S4 · P2 · Q10 Greek Tragic Dramas

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension 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

Tragic dramas written in Greece during the fifth century B.C. engender considerable scholarly debate over the relative influence of individual autonomy and the power of the gods on the drama’s action.

Topic

The debate over the role of personal autonomy versus the power of the gods in Greek tragic drama, especially in the plays of Aeschylus.

Framework

Present Debate

Main Point

Scholars debate whether Aeschylus’s tragic protagonists act out of personal, autonomous choice or are mainly driven by divine compulsion, with some arguing for autonomy, others for divine dominance, and a third position highlighting the tension between self and superhuman forces. *The Most Valuable Sentence(s):* - (P1 intro) - (last sentence)

P1: Autonomy Thesis and Its Supporters

This paragraph introduces the central debate and presents B. Snell’s view that Aeschylus’s dramas focus on protagonists who make difficult, deeply personal choices, highlighting human autonomy and individuality. Barbu adds that these plays show the rise of the individual as a “free agent” in Greek civilization.

P2: Critique—Emphasis on the Power of the Gods

This paragraph gives a counterargument from A. Rivier, who says Snell overstates human choice; instead, protagonists’ “decisions” are heavily shaped by superhuman (divine) forces, which operate both externally and internally, pressuring characters to follow a path dictated by necessity, not free will.

P3: A Synthesis—Tension Between Human Will and Divine Force

Here, A. Lesky disputes both extremes by examining the play *Agamemnon*, explaining that while the gods do exert constraint over the protagonist, Agamemnon’s own condemnable personal desires also play a role. For Lesky, Greek tragedy is defined by the persistent tension between personal will and superhuman necessity.

10.

It can be inferred from the passage that the central difference between the interpretations of Lesky and Rivier is over which one of the following points?

whether or not the tragic
Unrelated to Goal
We're looking for whether or not the protagonist chooses their action or has an action imposed upon them by the gods. This is talking about "the consequences of the actions".
2% picked this
whether or not the tragic
Unrelated to Goal
We're looking for whether or not the protagonist chooses their action or has an action imposed upon them by the gods. This is talking about whether the protagonist "acknowledges the role the deities play in their lives". Both Lesky and Rivier think that the influence of the gods is heavily tied up in the dilemma the protagonist is wrestling with, so they'd agree that the protagonist is aware that the deities are playing a role in creating this dilemma.
14% picked this
Correct
whether or not the tragic
Why this is right
We're looking for whether or not the protagonist chooses their action or has an action imposed upon them by the gods. This, in a weird way, expresses that distinction. Choosing an action implies that you desire to make that choice. If a choice is imposed on you, then your desires are irrelevant (they may or may not accord with the imposed choice; doesn't matter). Lesky thinks that the protagonist's desires have relevance to the outcome. Agamemnon chooses to sacrifice his daughter because he desires what the gods will give him in return. To Rivier, the gods impose a necessary choice and the protagonist tragically must take it, whether they want to or not.
Skill tested: Non-Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.
76% picked this
whether or not the actions
Both Agree
Rivier never really talks about how we morally evaluate the character's action, but Lesky does (Agamemnon chooses a path -- chosen by the gods for their own reasons -- on the basis of desires that must be condemned by us, because they are his own). Still, this answer is somewhat tempting, because it almost seems to be a stand-in for the crucial issue here of, "Does the protagonist choose the action or do the deities impose a choice on the protagonist?" Our common sense notion of "moral evaluation" includes the idea that you had a choice in what you were doing. If someone were forced by another entity to do X, we usually wouldn't hold that person morally accountable for X. But whether we're talking Lesky or Rivier, they would both agree that the actions of the deities are relevant. They would disagree in terms of how the deities' actions are irrelevant. Lesky would think that the deities actions are relevant insofar as they present one of the constraints that protagonist struggles with. Rivier (we might speculate) would think that the deities actions are relevant to our moral evaluation because we could "let the protagonist morally off the hook for doing something bad that was imposed by the deities".
7% picked this
whether or not the desires
Unrelated to Goal
We're looking for whether or not the protagonist chooses their action or has an action imposed upon them by the gods. This is comparing how ethical the protagonists' desires are to how ethical the deities' desires are. Neither scholar gets into that.
1% 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