Logical Reasoning

PT120 · S1 · Q9 Film historians have made two

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

Film historians have made two major criticisms of Depression-era filmmakers: first, that they were too uncritical of the economic status quo; and second, that they self-indulgently created films reflecting their own dreams and desires.

Conclusion (Thus)

The second criticism cannot be accurate. rephrase: Depression-era filmmakers did not self-indulgently create films reflecting their own dreams and desires.

Evidence

These filmmakers made their movies with an eye to profit and provided what their audiences most wanted in a film.

Evaluate

We're trying to prove that certain people , but the argument has provided any proving mechanism for such wording. So the correct answer will need to give us a rule that is like:

if xyz → then didn't self-indulgently create films to reflect own thinking

We're trying to prove this wording in relation to Depression-era filmmakers. The argument provided two facts about them, so the correct answer could use either / both of the facts to get us to that magical conclusion wording.

Goal

Look for,

made movies with → did not self-indulgently an eye to profit make films reflecting own dreams / desires

or

provided audiences did not self-indulgently with what they → make films reflecting most wanted own dreams / desires

9.

The conclusion of the argument follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

  1. To avoid self-indulgence, filmmakers should

    Too Weak

    This is a guideline for someone who wants to avoid self-indulgence. We need a rule that says, "If x is true, then you did not self-indulgently make films". Even if someone satisfied both conditions here, (1. take critical stance toward existing economic system, 2. allows audiences to form their own personal aspirations), that wouldn't prove that you have avoided self-indulgence. Similarly, if I said "to get into Harvard, students should apply as early as possible and submit at least one letter of recommendation" that wouldn't mean that satisfying those two conditions guarantees that you get into Harvard.

    2% picked this

  2. It is unjustified to demand

    Unrelated to Goal

    We need a rule that says, "If x is true, then you did not self-indulgently make films reflecting your own dreams / desires". This answer doesn't have any of that necessary conclusion language.

    1% picked this

  3. The people who regularly went

    Unrelated to Goal

    We need a rule that says, "If x is true, then you did not self-indulgently make films reflecting your own dreams / desires". This answer doesn't have any of that necessary conclusion language.

    3% picked this

  4. Depression-era filmmakers who did not

    Unrelated to Goal

    We need a rule that says, "If x is true, then you did not self-indulgently make films reflecting your own dreams / desires". This answer doesn't have any of that necessary conclusion language.

    1% picked this

  5. Correct

    It cannot be self-indulgent for

    Why this is right

    This is the only answer with a proving mechanism for the wording in our conclusion, that the filmmakers "did not self-indulgently create films reflecting their own dreams and desires". This says filmmaker gives an audience → cannot be what it most wants self-indulgent We were told that the Depression-era filmmakers provided what their audiences most wanted in a film. According to this rule, it cannot have been self-indulgent for the filmmakers to have done this. So we have proven that the Depression-era filmmakers were not self-indulgently creating films. Since this was the only answer that provided the New Concept in the Conclusion (only choice A otherwise had anything about self-indulgence), this was the only answer really worth reading or thinking about.

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

    93% 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