Logical Reasoning

PT120 · S3 · Q17 Art critic: Abstract paintings 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

Art critic: Abstract paintings are nonrepresentational, and so the only measure of their worth is their interplay of color, texture, and form.

Conclusion (Therefore)

Abstract painting can never be a politically significant art form.

Evidence

Abstract paintings are nonrepresentational, but a painting must represent social injustice in a clearly comprehensible way in order to spur the viewer into political action.

Evaluate

Because there are repeating ideas here (abstract paintings / represent vs. non represent / political action vs. politically significant), we could potentially approach this with a Conditional Logic mindset.

If we wanted to represent the Conclusion’s logic path with a long conditional, it would look like this:

Abstract -------------------> not politically Paintings significant art

We would then scan the evidence to see whether we were told any facts about Abstract Paintings, and whether we were provided with a rule that proves “not politically significant art”.

We were given the fact that Abstract Paintings are . We were told that .

That seems pretty definitional, so we don’t need to worry about adding that move. If something is non-representational, then it represents nothing, including social injustice.

Our chain is getting us from abstract paintings to something political, but the evidence only gets us to “won’t spur political action”, not to the conclusion's, “can never be a politically significant art form”.

Do you have to spur someone into political action to be considered a politically significant art form?

Goal

It looks like the missing link here is (or its contrapositive — all politically significant art forms spur people into political action)

17.

Which one of the following is an assumption that is required by the art critic's argument?

  1. Abstract painting cannot stimulate people

    Too Strong: cannot

    This argument already established that abstract painting doesn’t spur people into political action; it doesn’t need to assume the extreme position that it can’t stimulate people into any action.

    12% picked this

  2. Unless people view representations of

    Out of Scope: insignificant activity

    This argument was about whether a certain art form was politically significant. This answer is tossing a word salad and suddenly talking about whether political activity is significant.

    3% picked this

  3. Only art that prompts people

    Too Strong

    Too Strong: only Out of Scope: counter social injustice We’re only talking about spurring / prompting people into political action, not necessarily countering social injustice. We’re also only talking about whether an art form is politically significant, whereas this answer is trying to define a rule for all significant art. When an answer on Necessary Assumption is conditional, we can also look at how it would be diagrammed (and its contrapositive) and consider whether that would match any move the author made. Doesn’t spur ? Not people to counter significant social injustice art It’s very close to what we want, but we want Doesn’t spur people ? Not politically into political action significant art

    3% picked this

  4. Correct

    Paintings that fail to move

    Why this is right

    This provides the missing link we predicted. Doesn’t spur people ? Not politically into political action significant art If we negated this, we could object to the argument: “Hey, author — sure abstract paintings can’t represent social injustice, so they can’t spur people into political action. But paintings that fail to move a viewer to political action can still be politically significant. So you can’t conclude that abstract painting is a politically insignificant art form.”

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

    76% picked this

  5. The interplay of color, texture,

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope: representational Too Strong: not a measure Unmentioned ? Opposite This answer is doing the age old trap answer pattern of pretending like if the author says “Tall children love their moms” that it’s somehow assuming that “children who aren’t tall don’t love their moms”. Because the argument said that for nonrepresentational paintings, the interplay of color / texture / form was the measure of the worth, this answer is saying “oh, then you’re assuming that for representational paintings, those things aren’t any measure of worth”. This argument did need to assume that “the interplay of color, texture, and form cannot represent instances of social injustice in a clearly comprehensible way”, but that’s it.

    6% 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