Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT140 S3 Q14 Explanation

Some theorists argue that literary

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

TopicsSufficient Assumption

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

Start practicing free

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

Some theorists argue that literary critics should strive to be value-neutral in their literary criticism. These theorists maintain that by exposing the meaning of literary works without evaluating them, critics will enable readers to make their own judgments about the works' merits. But literary criticism cannot about what is an appropriate goal for literary criticism.

What this question is testing

Sufficient Assumption

Your task

Find the assumption that, if added, guarantees the conclusion follows.

Common trap

Answers that only partly bridge the gap, leaving the conclusion unproven.

Winning move

Identify the new term in the conclusion and pick the choice that links it to the evidence.

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

The question
14.

The argument's conclusion follows logically if which one of the following

Answer choices

  1. Bad Conclusion Match10% picked this

    Any critic who is able to help readers make their own judgments about literary works' merits should strive

    This is a rule that allows us to conclude that one should strive to produce value-neutral criticism. We're trying to find an answer that proves the author's conclusion, that critics should not strive to produce value-neutral criticism.

  2. Correct60% picked this

    If it is impossible to produce completely value-neutral literary criticism, then critics should not even

    Why this is right

    This just provides a conditional rule that goes from the author's premise to the author's conclusion. Premise Conclusion lit critics cannot lit critics should not be completely strive to be value-neutral value-neutral

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

  3. Unrelated to Goal5% picked this

    Critics are more likely to provide criticisms of the works they like than to provide criticisms of

    If an answer doesn't give us a way to prove the wording "should not strive to be value-neutral" then it's worthless to us. This answer doesn't give us any sort of black-and-white rule and doesn't discuss value-neutral criticism at all.

  4. Unrelated to Goal11% picked this

    The less readers understand the meaning of a literary work, the less capable they will be of

    This answer is about readers. We're looking for a rule that allows us to prove that critics "should not strive to be value-neutral".

  5. Unrelated to Goal13% picked this

    Critics who try to avoid rendering value judgments about the works they consider tend to influence readers' judgments

    This is another wishy-washy comparison. We're doing Sufficient Assumption. We need a rule with zero exceptions that forces the language of "should not strive to be value-neutral". Anything less than that will mean we haven't achieved the goal of deriving the conclusion.

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