LSAT 41, Logical Reasoning I, Q19, LSATHacks

LR Question 19 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Film critic: There has been a recent spate of so-called…

QUESTION TYPE: Principle

PARADOX: Filmmakers have a right to express absurd views, but no one is required to pay attention.

ANALYSIS: The first two sentences are just context. The last two sentences are the only important part. Filmmakers have a right to their views, but they don’t have a right to make people listen.

___________

1. It’s true the filmmakers are overreaching, but they are overreaching by claiming people should listen to them (this is implied). The critic does not address whether they are “justified” in speaking.
2. This goes too far. What if someone made a film accusing you of assassinating JFK to set the stage for 9/11? You might not want to ignore it then. You would be entitled to ignore refuse to believe the views expressed in the film of course. Ignoring a film and ignoring its conclusions are two different things.
3. The critic says the directors’ views are permitted, not necessary.
4. Actually, the critic implies that freedom of speech does permit the expression of lies as truth (“that claim is true,” referring to freedom of speech).
5. CORRECT. Yes. “You can say what you want, but I don’t have to listen.”

Recap: The question begins with “Film critic: There has been a recent spate of so-called”. It is a Principle question. Learn how to master LSAT Principle questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.