Logical Reasoning

PT157 · S2 · Q23 Filmmaker: I use hidden cameras when

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

Filmmaker: I use hidden cameras when filming documentaries, because people behave differently when they are aware of being filmed.

Conclusion (hence)

My are more worthwhile than other documentaries such as those where people speak directly to the camera.

Evidence

My subjects remain unaware of the camera's location and therefore act naturally.

Evaluate

The conclusion is a comparative normative idea: "more worthwhile".

So our answer should either be a conditional with an outcome of → more worthwhile

or it should be comparison about which things are "more worthwhile" than other things.

The comparative difference we have to go off is that this dude's documentaries involve subjects being unaware of the camera's location and acting naturally.

Goal

We want an answer to take us from what we know about his documentaries (the subjects aren't aware of the camera's location and act naturally) to what we want to prove about his documentaries (they're more worthwhile).

Look for something like or

23.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the filmmaker's argument?

  1. A documentary with no purpose

    Bad Evidence Match

    This is a rule that would help you conclude that a documentary can be legitimate. We want a rule that helps us conclude that a documentary is more worthwhile than others. So as soon as we see that conclusion mismatch, we can depart. Were we to read the whole thing, the trigger half of this (no purpose other than authentically depicting subjects' behavior) does not match anything we were told. This filmmaker didn't say the only purpose of his films is to authentically depict subjects behavior.

    1% picked this

  2. A documentary can be authentic

    Weaker Evidence Match

    This is a rule that would help us conclude that a documentary isn't authentic. But we're trying to conclude that this dude's documentaries are more worthwhile than others. If we knew his documentaries were authentic and the other ones weren't, would that essentially prove that his documentaries are more worthwhile? Is an authentic documentary automatically more worthwhile than an inauthentic one? No, those aren't equivalent ideas. I might find the TV show "The Office", which is not an authentic documentary, much more worthwhile than an authentic documentary. Beyond that problem, this rule also doesn't give us any way to prove that the filmmaker's films are authentic. This rule merely proves that docs where people speak directly to the camera aren't authentic.

    4% picked this

  3. Makers of documentaries do not

    Out of Scope

    This is far from the sort of rule we need. We need a rule that lets us conclude that these documentaries are more worthwhile than other documentaries. This is a rule that lets us conclude, "you don't have a moral obligation to reveal the location of cameras".

    1% picked this

  4. Correct

    The more authentically a documentary

    Why this is right

    This is a strong Volume Dial idea that would allow us to land on the desired conclusion that this dude's docs are more worthwhile than other docs. Do we know that this dude's docs "more authentically depict its subjects" than do docs where people speak directly to the camera? Yes, we have ammunition for saying that. When people are aware they're being filmed, they act differently. meanwhile This dude's subjects act naturally. So the evidence supports a contrast that the subjects of this documentary are acting more naturally while the subjects of other docs are behaving differently. That triggers this rule and takes us to the promised land that this guy's docs are more worthwhile than other docs.

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

    93% picked this

  5. Subjects of documentaries should not

    Out of Scope

    This is far from the sort of rule we need. We need a rule that lets us conclude that these documentaries are more worthwhile than other documentaries. This is a rule that lets us conclude, "the subjects should not try to find the location of the cameras!"

    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.

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