Logical Reasoning

PT151 · S3 · Q14 Music historian: In the past, radio stations

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

Music historian: In the past, radio stations would not play rock songs that were more than three minutes in length.

Statements

Rock songs used to be limited to 3 minutes to get played on the radio.

During that 3 minute era, rockers said, "you're stifling our creativity".

When the 3 minute limit was removed, some critics said, "Ah, now rock music has become artistic."

pivot (however) causal (when X happened, it became Y) causal (because)

Removing the 3 minute limit led to song structures breaking down and the music becoming aimless.

Being derived from certain style of music led to rock music's difficulty in making good songs of extended length.

Evaluate

When we read Inference paragraphs, we are hoping to find claims that can be synthesized, usually by finding some Overlapping Information.

And we read carefully for indicator wording that provides hints about what is being tested: - Conditional - Causal - Mathematical - Ends w/ Pivot

The last sentence is extra juicy here, because it is introduced with a pivot, "however" and contains two causal ideas.

When the last claim in an Inference paragraph begins with a pivot, it's usually a sign that our job is to reconcile that last idea with what came before it. Most of the time it will create some tension that forces a mathematical inference or triggers the contrapositive of some rule.

In this case, it's more like a Rebuttal. Some music critics were claiming that, . In other words, some critics think it was a good thing to remove the 3 minute limit.

Our author disagrees. She says that removing the 3 minute limit was a bad thing (song structures broke down and the music became aimless).

The final idea is suggesting, .

Goal

We don't know precisely what to look for, but we can anticipate that it will have the rebuttal vibe of,

14.

Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the music historian's claims?

  1. Rock music is not a

    Too Strong

    Too Strong: not a good outlet Out of Scope: great many ideas This is a very strongly worded answer (red flag) because it's saying that for any creative musician with a great many ideas, rock music is not a good outlet. Ouch! For none of them? This author wasn't saying that rock music is incompatible with "creativity / having a great many ideas". This author was just saying that rock music isn't good at doing longer songs.

    1% picked this

  2. Rock music must borrow from

    Too Strong: must

    This is a very strongly worded answer (red flag) because it's saying, "If rock music doesn't borrow from styles more conducive to long songs, then it will never become artistic". Our author never said that rock music isn't artistic. There were just some critics who argued that rock music didn't become artistic until rock musicians were allowed to make songs longer than 3 minutes. Our author might think that rock music is already artistic, whether it's under or over 3 minutes. Her only stance is that rock music has structural problems and focus problems when it's allowed to go more than 3 minutes. But something can still be artistic even if it has problems with structure and focus.

    5% picked this

  3. Rock music requires more discipline

    Too Strong

    Too Strong: requires Out of Scope: discipline / other music Nothing in this paragraph allows us to compare rock music to any other genre, other than the fact that it's implied that, "at least some styles of music are better suited to songs of extended length than rock music is". We could better sign off on an answer that says, "Rock music is better suited to concision than are some other forms of music". But we can't say it requires more discipline.

    1% picked this

  4. Correct

    Rock music can sometimes benefit

    Why this is right

    This is by far the most safely worded answer available ("sometimes" = only one data point of support needed). This reinforces the causal idea in our author's rebuttal. She was arguing that removing the commercial 3 minute barrier led to the song structures breaking down and the music becomes aimless. So we have at least one data point in which rock music benefits from a commercial barrier: the commercial barrier of 3 minute max length helps rock music to be more structurally stable and focused. We might call this a Flip the Causal Difference-Maker type answer. Since she told us that "removing the barrier made rock music worse in some ways", the correct answer says, "having the barrier made rock music better in some ways".

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

    93% picked this

  5. Rock music is best when

    Too Strong

    Too Strong: best Out of Scope: self-conscious The author never defines when rock music is at its best. She definitely believes that rock music was better in at least two ways when it was forced to stick within a 3 minute length, but that's all we know. And the passage never discusses whether musicians thought of themselves as self-conscious artists.

    0% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

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