Logical Reasoning

PT155 · S4 · Q14 Deborra: The art of still

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

Deborra: The art of still photography cannot enable us to understand the world.

Conclusion

The art of still photography can't enable us to understand the world.

Evidence

Accept the world as it looks or Don't inquire → can't understand into the world's reality world

Reality ≠ images. Reality = functions.

Doesn't narrate → can't help us understand

Evaluation

Lots of potholes here, so it's hard to predict which one the answer might fill.

The art of still photography is a New Term in the Conclusion and thus will almost certainly be in the correct answer.

We are assuming that still photography does not involve refusing to accept the world as it looks. We're assuming that still photography does not involve inquiring into the world's reality. We're assuming that still photography only lets us see images, not functions. We're assuming that still photography doesn't narrate.

Goal

Look for one of the four missing links.

14.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which Deborra's argument depends?

  1. Artists who take still photographs

    Too Strong: don't attempt

    It doesn't hurt the author's argument if still photographers attempt to understand the world. The author is ultimately saying their attempt will be futile, but it doesn't hurt the author to say that they're attempting.

    2% picked this

  2. The functioning of the world

    Too Broad: captured on film

    The author is assuming that "still photography" does not convey the functioning of the world. But moving photography (i.e. films), might be something the author believes can convey the functioning of the world.

    16% picked this

  3. Correct

    The art of still photography

    Why this is right

    The author's first claim, her conclusion, says: Still Photography → can't help understand Her last claim, one of her premises says: doesn't narrate → can't help understand So she's assuming: Still Photography → doesn't narrate → can't help understand If we negated this, it would sound like a big objection to follow-up on the author's last claim. AUTHOR: only that which narrates can enable us to understand. NEGATED (C): cool, well still photography does narrate!

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

    79% picked this

  4. A complete understanding of the

    Too Strong: not attainable through art

    This argument is just about what still photography can't do, not about what the whole of art can / can't do.

    2% picked this

  5. Images cannot be properly explained.

    Out of Scope: properly explained

    There's no language like "properly explained" when it comes to images. Properly explaining an image ≠ understanding the world.

    2% 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