Logical Reasoning

PT143 · S1 · Q3 Critic: Rock music is musically

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

Critic: Rock music is musically bankrupt and socially destructive, but at least the album covers of rock LPs from the 1960s and 1970s often featured innovative visual art.

Conclusion

Rock music has nothing going for it.

Evidence

Rock music [has always been] musically bankrupt and socially destructive, but at least the album covers of rock LPs in the 60s and 70s were great art.

Now, digital music has basically ended the production of LPs.

Evaluate

We could anticipate a Missing Link assumption by connecting premise and conclusion language like, .

But since the conclusion is so strongly worded, it's also tempting to spitball some objections.

Given that ... rock is musically bankrupt, socially destructive, and no longer has the cool art-on-LP cover thing,

How can we argue that .... rock music does have at least something going for it?

Well, besides the music, the socializing, and the album art ... how about the fact that it gives a political voice to some people? It's a good way to do drugs together, off the streets? It helps plants to grow?

I don't expect any of these to be answers, but we would weaken the argument with any potential use or virtue of rock music, so the author is assuming all kinds of Defending assumptions like, .

Goal

We anticipated a linking idea, but I don't really think that's what's being tested. I would go to the answers a little fuzzy, thinking:

- if I see what looks like a conditional / linking idea, I'll ask myself

- if I see any answer (especially ones with "not"), I'll use the Negation Test. If negating an answer turns it into a weakening objection, then it's correct.

3.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the critic's argument relies?

  1. Correct

    Digital music is not distributed

    Why this is right

    Since this has a "not", it's time to negate it (by removing the not) and asking ourselves if it's become an Objection. negation: digital music is distributed with accompanying innovative visual art. Does that weaken? Sure! The author was saying, "Rock used to have one good thing going for it: innovative visual art on the album cover. But now album covers are gone." He was assuming that this means that innovative visual art is gone as well, but when we negate this answer it's saying, "Nah, buddy, rock music still has that innovative visual art you like". This argument was Assuming a Difference, which often feels so obvious we don't even notice it enough to name it explicitly.

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

    88% picked this

  2. Although very few LPs are

    Too Strong: most

    The word "most" is wrong 99% of the time you see it on Necessary Assumption (it's only been correct when the word "most" is actually in the Conclusion). Why does the author need to assume that at least 51% of the scant LP's produced these days are rock LPs? Would it hurt the argument if we negated this and said, "No, only 49% of the tiny crop of LPs produced today are rock LP's"? Of course not. "Most" is (almost) always wrong because negating a "most" claim just takes you from believing something is true at least 51% of the time to believing it's true at most 49% of the time. That difference never weakens, so negating never weakens, thus the answer is never correct.

    2% picked this

  3. In the 1960s and 1970s,

    Too Strong

    Too Strong: only Only One Mentioned ? Only Thing This does what so many Necessary Assumption trap answers do. It acts like the only thing mentioned is the only thing. For example, if the argument said, "blue M&Ms are delicious", the trap answer would say, "red M&Ms aren't delicious". Affirming one thing doesn't mean you're saying it's the only thing possessing that trait (see also: Black Lives Matter vs. All Lives Matter)

    4% picked this

  4. The LPs being produced today

    Weaken-ish

    We don't know what the author believes about LP art today. He only said art from the 60s and 70s was often innovative. He might still think that's true or might think that people don't care anymore and the album covers are boring. If we negate this and say, "the LPs produced today do not have innovative cover art", then that only strengthens his argument that rock music has nothing going for it.

    3% picked this

  5. Rock music is less sophisticated

    Out of Scope Comparison

    The author doesn't indicate that rock music's current state of being musically bankrupt and socially destructive is any different from before, so we have no way to say the author must believe this comparison. If we negated it and said "rock music is at the same level of low sophistication and high social destruction now that it was in the 60s and 70s", it wouldn't hurt the author.

    3% 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