Logical Reasoning

PT153 · S2 · Q16 Art may make the world more beautiful

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

Art may make the world more beautiful, but one should choose a career in some profession other than art.

Conclusion (should)

One should choose a career in some profession other than art.

Evidence

How much artists get paid (if at all) is determined by subjective evaluations of their work.

It is unacceptable for one's pay to be determined by subjective evaluations of one's work.

Evaluate

We can synthesize these two premises together to derive the inference that, "It is unacceptable how artists get paid". That means that the author is assuming some Linking idea like,

What about coming up with a potential Objection?

Given that ... your pay is determined by subjective evaluations of your work, How could we argue that ... you should choose a career in art?

We could say,

It also seems like getting paid based on subjective evaluations of your work is something common to tons of jobs. Don't we often have performance reviews with our employer, where they decide if / how much of a raise we'll get?

Goal

Look for an answer addressing the missing link between "unacceptable determinant of pay = bad career choice" or one presenting some objection that allows us to argue it's still fine to choose a career in art (such as being okay living modestly in exchange for getting to do something you love).

16.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

  1. takes for granted that people

    Too Strong: solely

    We know that whenever we see takes for granted / presumes / fails to establish that a Flaw answer is saying, "The author assumed that X", and so we are careful about strong language, since authors usually aren't assuming super strong ideas. This author definitely assumes that how your pay is determined (not the same as 'how much you're paid') is an important factor. But she doesn't assume that how much you're paid is the only factor, when choosing a career. Given two other career choices that pay the same amount, is this author obligated to believe that both of those career choices are equally desirable? Of course not. She could still say that one is better than the other if it's superior in terms of family benefits, travel opportunities, better commute, etc.

    18% picked this

  2. takes for granted that a

    Too Strong: everyone or no one

    Again, it says takes for granted, so again we ask ourselves, "Was the author assuming X?" This answer offers a crazy claim that no one in the real world would ever believe: a work of art will either be considered beautiful by 100% of people or by 0% of people? Our author didn't come anywhere near making that absurd claim.

    1% picked this

  3. Correct

    overlooks the possibility that one?s

    Why this is right

    When Flaw answer choices begin with fails to consider / overlooks the possibility then, assuming the author never addressed this idea, we ask ourselves, "Would this weaken? Does this sound like an objection to the logic?" Would it hurt this argument if we said, "Hey, author --- in every profession, your pay is somewhat determined by subjective evaluation"? Sure! The author was making it seem like this was a peculiar characteristic of careers in art. She seemed to be Assuming a Difference, like were we to choose some other career then our pay would not be determined by subjective evaluations of our work.

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

    73% picked this

  4. overlooks the possibility that some

    Not an Objection

    Because this says overlooks the possibility we can ask ourselves, "Would it weaken or sound like an objection to say 'some artists get paid very well'?" No, because the author wasn't denying the possibility that some artists make plenty of money. She was mad not at the amount that artists make but the way that amount is determined -- by someone else's subjective evaluation of the artist's work.

    1% picked this

  5. treats a criterion that must

    Wrong Flaw: not Necessary vs. Sufficient

    This answer is alluding to the #1 famous flaw Necessary vs. Sufficient, in which an argument presents a conditional statement as a premise, but then tries to use that conditional rule illegally in a backwards or opposite fashion. Was there a conditional rule in the evidence? Yes, the last sentence could be a conditional rule: pay determined by subject evaluation ? unacceptable of your work If the argument were committing this flaw, then the rest of the argument would sound either like, "Bob's pay is unacceptable. Thus, he must get paid based on subjective evaluation of his work", or like, "Bob's pay isn't determined by subjective evaluation of his work. Thus, Bob's pay must be acceptable."

    8% 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