LSAT 152 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q24

LR Question 24 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Andy Warhol’s Brillo Boxes is a stack of boxes …

QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Appearance doesn’t entirely determine whether something is art.

REASONING: Warhol’s Brillo Boxes look the same as a stack of normal boxes. Warhol’s work is considered art, while the normal stack wouldn’t be.

ANALYSIS: The argument is attacking a general theory: the idea that appearance alone determines whether something is art.

It attacks that theory by giving a counterexample.

• Two things are visually the same.
• One is considered art, the other is not.
• If appearance alone determined what counts as art, that difference would be impossible.
• But the difference exists, so the theory must be false.

So it’s showing that a theory can’t be true because something inconsistent with it actually occurs. That’s answer E.

___________

1. The argument isn’t distinguishing mistaken beliefs from reality.
2. There’s no ambiguity in wording being exposed.
3. This is actually the opposite of what the argument does. It says two visually identical things can differ in whether they count as art.
4. This is too vague. The argument doesn’t examine hidden assumptions. It directly refutes the theory by showing a counterexample.
5. CORRECT. If appearance determined status as art, then it wouldn’t be possible that Brillo Boxes and a normal stack of boxes could look the same yet differ in status. So the theory is undermined.