Logical Reasoning

PT131 · S3 · Q24 Eighteenth-century European

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

Eighteenth-century European aesthetics was reasonably successful in providing an understanding of all art, including early abstract art, until the 1960s, when artists self-consciously rebelled against earlier notions of art.

Conclusion

There can be no complete theory of aesthetics.

Evidence

We thought we had a pretty successful theory that seemed complete, until the 1960s when rebellious artists managed to make beautiful stuff that didn't fit within earlier notions of art.

Evaluation

The author thinks that since these 1960s rebels made art that should be encompassed by a complete theory of aesthetics, but isn't encompassed by the 18th century aesthetic theory, then we'll just never have a complete theory.

We should probably be responding with something like,

Goal

Look for an answer naming the assumption that , or an answer raising the objection that there might one day be a theory that covers what the 18th century theory covered as well as the weird 60s stuff.

24.

The reasoning above is most vulnerable to criticism in that it

takes for granted that it
Out of Scope Comparison
Out of Scope Comparison: "more important" Opposite The author is never ranking importance, and if anything it seems like she considers it equally important that a complete theory would account for traditional as well as 1960s art.
5% picked this
presumes, without providing justification, that
Opposite
It actually seems like the author thinks that the 60s artists were "self-consciously" rebelling against earlier notions. Either way, whether they were consciously or unconsciously trying to rebel against the 18th century theory, it wouldn't change the problem the author is addressing: is it possible to have an aesthetic theory that could encompass both the previous art and this new art.
26% picked this
presumes, without providing justification, that
Too Strong: "cannot be applied"
The author isn't committing herself to the idea that any aesthetic theory developed in area X can't be applied in area Y. The author is only assuming / stating that the 18th century European aesthetic theory can't be applied to the 1960s art. We don't even know the geographical location of the 1960s art.
4% picked this
presumes, without providing justification, that
Too Strong: "the only art"
If we're wondering to ourselves, "was the author assuming this?", we can use the Negation Test: if we negated this, and there were other forms of art that eluded the 18th century theory, would that hurt the author's argument? No, that would strengthen the idea that we won't be able to find an all-encompassing theory.
4% picked this
Correct
presumes, without providing justification, that
Why this is right
Our author fails to consider that we could just make a new aesthetic theory that is wide enough to encompass the 1960s art as well. Thus, she assumes we can't make a wider theory. She is being defeatist, thinking, "Sigh ... if the 1960s art doesn't fit within that 18th century theory, then I guess we're screwed in terms of hoping to make a complete theory." Hence, she is assuming that the 18th century theory was the closest we were gonna get to having a complete theory.
Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
62% 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