People may praise the talent

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsMethod

Keep going in LSAT Lab

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

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

People may praise the talent of a painter capable of realistically portraying a scene and dismiss as artistically worthless the efforts of abstract expressionists, but obviously an exact replica of the scene depicted is not the only thing people appreciate have entirely displaced painting as an art form.

What this question is testing

Method

Your task

Describe how the argument proceeds — the technique it uses to reach its conclusion.

Common trap

Answers that describe a method the argument doesn't actually use.

Winning move

Track the role each statement plays, then match that to the choice describing the same moves.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question

26.

The argument proceeds

Answer choices

Bad Premise Match28% picked this
using a claim about what most people appreciate to support an
It's possibly fair to call the intermediate conclusion ("people appreciate more than just an exact replica in a painting") is an aesthetic principle. But is there a premise that talks about what most people appreciate? No. The premise is saying "If people only wanted a painting to replicate reality, then photography would have replaced painting." Even though that conditional contains an indirect sentiment that (most) people want a painting to do more than just replicate reality, it feels weird to call it a claim about what most people appreciate.
28%
Out of Scope: defend the tastes18% picked this
appealing to an aesthetic principle to defend the tastes that
The author isn't defending people's tastes. If anything, she's defending abstract expressionists. The author doesn't appeal to an aesthetic principle; the conclusion, not the premise, is an aesthetic principle. The author appeals to the fact that an implication of the conclusion's falsity has not occurred.
18%
Reversed5% picked this
explaining a historical fact in terms of the artistic preferences
The author is using a historical fact (photography never displaced painting) as a way to support a claim about the artistic preferences of people. This language would not be a correct answer, but this argument is closer to "explaining the artistic preferences of people in terms of a historical fact".
5%
Correct40% picked this
appealing to a historical fact to support a claim about people's
Why this is right
This is in the correct order. The author appeals to the historical fact that photography didn't displace painting in order to support a claim about people's artistic preferences (exact realism is not the only thing they prefer/appreciate in a painting).
Skill tested: Method · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
40%
Out of Scope: defend preferences9% picked this
considering historical context to defend the artistic preferences
The author isn't defending people's artistic preferences. If anything, she's defending abstract expressionists against people who dismiss their efforts as artistically worthless.
9%

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