LSAT 106 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q24

LR Question 24 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: We ought to pay attention only to the intrinsic…

QUESTION TYPE: Sufficient Assumption

CONCLUSION: A painting’s aesthetic relevance comes from what it directly presents to experience.

The symbolism of a painting isn’t relevant.

REASONING: We should only pay attention to the intrinsic properties of a painting. We shouldn’t pay attention to a painting’s extrinsic properties.

When looking at a painting, you should only pay attention to what is directly presented.

ANALYSIS: This argument tells us what we should do. Just pay attention to the intrinsics.

We’re told not to pay attention to symbolism. But we don’t know what symbolism is. If symbolism has some intrinsic elements, then maybe we should pay attention to it.

The right answer shows that symbolism has nothing intrinsic.

If you don’t know what intrinsic and extrinsic elements are, don’t worry. The question defines them for you. The third sentence says we should pay attention to “only what is directly presented”. Those are the intrinsic properties.

___________

1. CORRECT. If this is true, it means the argument is correct that we shouldn’t pay attention to the symbolic aspects. We’re supposed to pay attention only to the intrinsic parts of the painting.
2. This doesn’t tell us we shouldn’t pay attention to symbolism. We still don’t know what symbolism is.
3. This pretty much repeats the first sentence. It can’t help prove the conclusion.
4. Great! This makes things easy. If there’s no symbolism, then we certainly can’t pay attention to it.
    
   But this doesn’t tell us what to do with paintings that do have symbolism.
5. This defines an intrinsic property. It doesn’t tell us why we shouldn’t pay attention to symbolism.