LSAT 118 | Section 4 | Logical Reasoning: Q17

LR Question 17 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Art critic: Criticism focuses on two issues …

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Judgments about the quality of art are only a matter of taste.

REASONING: Either an artwork’s value is intrinsic or extrinsic. If it’s not intrinsic, then it must be extrinsic.

ANALYSIS: This is partially a Necessary Assumption question hidden within a Flawed Reasoning question.

The critic starts with two issues:

1. Is value intrinsic or extrinsic?
2. Are judgments objective or merely matters of taste?

Then the critic claims the issues are related, because: If value isn’t intrinsic, it must be extrinsic, and therefore judgments about quality can only be matters of taste.

Notice where the unsupported jump happens. The argument goes: Extrinsic value → taste.

But why? Nothing in the stimulus establishes that. An artwork’s value could be extrinsic and still be judged objectively.

For example, suppose the value of a historical artifact depends on its historical significance (an extrinsic feature). Experts might still evaluate that significance objectively, but the argument concludes that judgments about its quality must be based on taste.

So the argument assumes: If value is extrinsic, judgments about it cannot be objective.

Another way to see the flaw is that the critic acts as though it is limited to this:

1. Intrinsic → could be objective or taste
2. Extrinsic → can only be taste

But they haven’t explained why extrinsic can’t be objective.

___________

1. The critic is not assuming all judgments are matters of taste. The whole point is to argue that they become matters of taste if value is extrinsic.
2. Agreement is irrelevant to the reasoning. The argument never discusses agreement among people.
3. CORRECT. The argument moves from “Value is extrinsic” to “Quality judgments are merely matters of taste.” That only works if objective judgments about extrinsic value are impossible.
4. Even if intrinsic value were sometimes judged subjectively, the critic could still make the argument about extrinsic value. They never claimed intrinsic value was limited to either subjective or objective judgments.
5. The argument does not require that any artwork actually possess intrinsic value. The conclusion is conditional: If extrinsic → taste. Whether intrinsic value actually exists is irrelevant.