Logical Reasoning

PT118 · S1 · Q10 Rachel: Though contemporary artists are

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

Rachel: Though contemporary artists are pleased to be free of the constraints that bound their predecessors, this freedom has caused a decline in the quality of art.

Rachel's Claims

1. Contemporary artists are pleased to be free of constraints that bound their predecessors.

2. This freedom has caused a decline in the quality of art.

3. Great art is produced only when artists struggle within externally imposed boundaries.

James's Responses

1. NO COMMENT -- James never talks about contemporary artists or about whether they're happy to be less constrained.

2. DISAGREES -- James seems to be resisting the idea that there's a decline in quality. .

3. NO COMMENT -- James doesn't get into the conditions under which great art can be produced.

Goal

Since P2 disagrees with one of P1's explicit claims, we should start by scanning to the answers to see if we can find one about whether or not contemporary art has declined in quality relative to past eras.

10.

On the basis of their statements, Rachel and James are committed to disagreeing with each other about whether

  1. Correct

    contemporary art is of lower

    Why this is right

    Rachel would agree, as she states outright that freedom "has caused a decline in the quality of art". James would disagree, since he says people "mistakenly think that contemporary art is generally inferior to earlier art," which implies that contemporary art is not generally inferior to earlier art.

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

    83% picked this

  2. contemporary artists are bound by

    Half Scope

    Rachel would disagree, since she says contemporary artists are "free of the constraints that bound their predecessors". But can we infer from James's paragraph that contemporary artists ARE bound by the same constraints? No. James never mentions constraints or contemporary artists.

    6% picked this

  3. great art is produced only

    Nobody Disagrees

    This is Rachel's second sentence almost word for word, so she agrees. James says nothing about what conditions produce great art. He might agree, disagree, or have no opinion, and the passage gives no way to tell.

    4% picked this

  4. inferior art from past eras

    Half Scope

    James clearly believes this; it is the engine of his explanation that inferior art from all eras is eventually forgotten. But could we derive from Rachel's paragraph that she thinks, "inferior art from past eras is usually remembered?" No. Rachel never discusses what happens to inferior art from the past.

    1% picked this

  5. one can correctly assess the

    Out of Scope

    This is a strong idea ("the only way to correctly assess the quality of art") which neither speaker addresses. We definitely can't derive this claim from either speaker (we couldn't derive the Disagree position either, but we don't need to think that deeply. If we can't infer the answer itself from either speaker, it's a non-starter.)

    5% 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