Logical Reasoning

PT152 · S1 · Q16 A popular complaint about abstract expressionist

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

A popular complaint about abstract expressionist paintings—that “a child could paint that”—holds that their stylistic similarities to young children’s paintings show that they are no more aesthetically pleasing than those inexpert works.

Main Conclusion

Abstract expressionist paintings are aesthetically pleasing.

Intermediate Conclusion

The complaint that is refuted. (abstract expressionism is more aesthetically pleasing than kids' paintings)

Premise

In a study, most participants consistently rated abstract expressionist stuff more aesthetically pleasing than kids' paintings.

Evaluate

It's not crucial that we see the conclusion as an Intermediate Conclusion and thereby a Main Conclusion. But it is important we think about both of the claims that conclusion is making.

- Have they actually refuted the complaint? Have they shown that abstract expressionism is more aesthetically pleasing than kids' paintings, given that most people in this study thought so?

No, we could still fight. We could say something was wrong with the study. The quality of abstract stuff was better than average, and/or the quality of kids' paintings was worse than average. Or the people were unrepresentative. They were full of art history majors who could tell the difference.

- Have they proven that abstract expressionism is aesthetically pleasing. Wait, didn't we just adjudicate this? How is this different from the previous claim?

The previous claim was that This claim is that "A.E. is aesthetically pleasing."

If you're better than a kid at chess, does that mean you're good at chess? If you're stronger than a kid, does that mean you're strong? If you're wealthier than a kid, does that mean you're wealthy?

This is the ol' Relative vs. Absolute distinction that LSAT is constantly testing.

Goal

Look for an answer protecting the integrity of the study (i.e. if it's more aesthetically pleasing than X, then it's aesthetically pleasing".

16.

The argument depends on assuming which one of the following?

  1. People are better at judging

    Irrelevant Comparison

    Nothing in the argument dealt with the distinction of "judging a painting by itself vs. judging a painting by comparing to another". Would negating this become an objection? No, the author would not be bothered if people were just as good at judging the aesthetic value of a painting when they saw it alone as they were when they saw it compared to another painting.

    20% picked this

  2. Correct

    Most of the preschoolers’ paintings

    Why this is right

    This is a weird correct answer, but it has the attractive feature (on Necessary Assumption) of saying something was not the case. These are the moments when we're most likely to profit from trying the Negation test. If we said, "Hey, author most of the kids' paintings were aesthetically displeasing", would that be an objection? Yes, because it addresses the Relative vs. Absolute switch. It's saying, "Sure, most people in the study thought that the abstract expressionism was more pleasing than the kids' paintings, but the kids' paintings were garbage. So the study proves that abstract expressionism is more pleasing than garbage. That doesn't prove that abstract expressionism is pleasing." There would be very little chance of understanding this answer if we didn't spot the Relative vs. Absolute shift to that final conclusion.

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

    53% picked this

  3. Each painting shown to the

    Weakens

    The author would not want the paintings to have all been labeled. This is supposed to be a blind taste-test. If the people know that they're either seeing a master painter or a preschooler, that may very well alter how they see the paintings / how they rank their preferences. Our author wants a blind taste-test, where people don't know and they're just picking based on their aesthetic preference.

    3% picked this

  4. Participants who did not consistently

    Way Too Specific

    The author doesn't need to assume anything about the minority of participants that that weren't as obviously in favor of the abstract expressionists. Sure, it would strengthen her case if they were still largely preferring the expressionists over the kids, but it's not necessary. It doesn't meaningfully hurt the argument if the participants who didn't prefer the expressionists totally preferred the kids. They are the minority either way.

    11% picked this

  5. There were few stylistic similarities

    Too Strong: few similarities

    Would it hurt the author's argument if there were many stylistic similarities between expressionists and the kids? No, it doesn't matter. Either way, most of the study participants thought the expressionists' were more aesthetically pleasing, and the author's conclusion is only about whether those painting are (more) aesthetically pleasing. The conclusion doesn't hinge in any way on whether the expressionists' paintings are stylistically distinct.

    13% 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