LSAT 107 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q20

LR Question 20 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Pieces of music consist of sounds and silences present…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: A big distinction between music and painting is that music is heard over time while art doesn’t change over time.

REASONING: We have to listen to music in the order it is played, but we can look at paintings however we want.

ANALYSIS: This is a pretty good argument. But answer choice E does raise a slight difficulty. We are prone to looking at paintings according to a certain order, even if we’re not forced to.

In fact, great artists can force us to follow a set order when looking at their paintings.

___________

1. This is a different meaning of time. With music, we listen to a song in order. With a painting, we can look at it in any order, even if we look at it for a long time.
2. So? All music has a temporal dimension, no matter the style. You listen to it as it is played.
3. The argument didn’t say that painting and music are entirely different. It just said that they have one major difference: time and the lack thereof.
4. There is no circular reasoning. The argument uses evidence about music to distinguish paintings from music. Circular reasoning is where the evidence is exactly the same as the conclusion.
5. CORRECT. The eyes often does follow a path when looking at a painting, even if we don’t realize it. So in that way our experience of a painting can be like our experience of music. First we look at one spot, then the next, and so on.
    
   This isn’t a very powerful objection, but it’s better than the other answer choices.

Recap: The question begins with “Pieces of music consist of sounds and silences present”. It is a Flawed Reasoning question. Learn more about LSAT Flaw questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.