LSAT Hacks

The Explanations That Should Have Come With The LSAT

  • Start Here
    • About
  • LSAT Explanations
  • LSATHacks Pro
  • Course
  • Mastery seminars
  • Tutoring
  • Books
  • Login
LSAT Explanations » LSAT Preptest 74 » Logical Reasoning 1 » Question 11

LSAT 74, Logical Reasoning I, Q11

LSAT 74 Explanations

LR Question 11 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Critic: In her presentation of important works of…

QUESTION TYPE: Most Strongly Supported

FACTS:

  1. Waverly wanted to be objective.
  2. Waverly wrote better about art she likes.

ANALYSIS: This is a confusing stimulus. It requires you to think in real world terms.

Bias can be subtle. If someone claims to be neutral, but they consistently write better about things they like, then that’s a form of bias.

Waverly said she wanted to be neutral. Since Waverly did have a bias, we can say that it seems she failed to achieve her stated goal.

___________

  1. Waverly didn’t say what all art historians should do. Instead, Waverly only described what she tried to do. Maybe Waverly thinks art historians can have opinions in other cases.
  2. The critic said Waverly writes better about art she likes than about art she doesn’t care about. That actually implies this answer is false: if you are indifferent to art then you won’t like or dislike it.
  3. Hard to say what Waverly’s intention was. She may have honestly tried to write neutrally, but failed in her aim.
  4. CORRECT. This seems probable. If you write better about art you like, then that is a form of bias.
  5. This is a strong accusation. It’s equally likely that Waverly wanted to be objective, but failed. Objectivity is hard.

Previous Question
Table Of Contents
Next Question




Free Logical Reasoning lesson

Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

I run LSAT Hacks, and got a 177 on the LSAT. The single best thing I've ever made is the set of LSAT Mastery seminars. They show you how to think like a 170+ scorer when doing questions. Get them here: Mastery Seminars

I guarantee you'll like them, or you get your money back within 7 days. There's no risk. Check the reviews, people have said they improved within a few days.
---------
Photos and Updates: You can follow me on Instagram here

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

Comments

  1. Carly says

    July 1, 2018 at 12:02 pm

    Hi Graeme,

    What do you make of the word “pretense” in the stimulus? I got this question right the first time, and I see why D is correct, but upon reviewing, I found C tempting. The “critic” suggests Waverly has a “pretense of objectivity”. Answer C infers a bit too much about her intentions, but it would be helpful to know how to read the term “pretense” if it comes up on other LSAT questions.

    Thank you so much!

    Carly

    Reply
    • TutorLucas (LSAT Hacks) says

      August 18, 2018 at 4:44 pm

      I’d take “pretence” here to mean what it normally means in this sort of context — “the appearance of”, with the implication that the appearance is false or misleading in some way. You should use the context of the stimulus to discern which definition of pretence you should use when answering questions in future.

      Even given that this is the definition of pretence, there is still a very clear reasons to eliminate (C). As you’ve pointed out, even if the appearance is false, perhaps she had a genuine intent to be objective.

      Reply
  2. Dave Scotese says

    May 23, 2018 at 11:30 pm

    I still say E. is a good answer, and possibly better than D. The fact is that the critic wrote “A pretense of objectivity” and the question stem says, “The critic’s statements, if true…”

    Okay, I see my failure. Perhaps you’ll honor me by adding it to your explanation. While one of the critic’s statements implies that Waverly used a pretense, the statement avoids actually saying that her objectivity was a pretense. He’s simply pointing out that pretense doesn’t work. The facts (if the critic’s other statements are true) indicate that she was NOT objective, and a misapprehension (such as Waverly’s) is LIKE a pretense. I see it now as a subtle trap our testmaker laid for people like me.

    Reply
    • TutorLucas (LSAT Hacks) says

      September 23, 2018 at 3:53 pm

      Thanks Dave for your comment! Glad it makes sense now. We appreciate your feedback.
      -Reply from LSAT Tutor, Morgan Barrett

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Free LSAT Email Course

My best LSAT tips, straight to your inbox


New! LSATHacks Pro: Get every course on LSATHacks for $49.99/month

LSATHacks Pro

LSAT Course, LSAT Mastery seminars, and 3,000 extra explanations. All for $49.99/month, satisfaction guaranteed, no minimum commitment. Sign up here: https://lsathacks.com/lsathacks-pro/

Testimonials

Your emails are tremendously helpful. - Matt

Thanks for the tips! They were very helpful, and even make you feel like you studied a bit. Great insight and would love more! - Haj

Dear Graeme: MUCH MORE PLEASE!! Your explanations are very clear, and you give equal importance to why answers are WRONG, as well as why THE ANSWER is right!! Very well done. Thank you for all your efforts - Tom

These have been awesome. More please!!! - Caillie

The course was immensely helpful and has eased my nerves a lot. - Lovlean

© Copyright 2022 LSAT Hacks. All Rights Reserved. | FAQ/Legal

Disclaimer: Use of this site requires official LSAT preptests; the explanations are of no use without the preptests. If you do not have the accompanying preptests, you can find them here: LSAT preptests
LSAT is copyright of LSAC. LSAC does not review or endorse specific test preparation materials or services and has not reviewed this site.
×
Item Added to your Cart!
There are no products
Continue Shopping