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 2 » Question 16

LSAT 74, Logical Reasoning II, Q16

LSAT 74 Explanations

LR Question 16 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Most commentators on Baroque painting…

QUESTION TYPE: Sufficient Assumption

CONCLUSION: Either the commentators are wrong, or Mather’s definition of Baroque is wrong.

REASONING: The commentators think Caravaggio was Baroque. Mather thinks Baroque paintings must be opulent, extravagant, with heroic sweep.

ANALYSIS: This argument makes a really big error. The author never said whether Caravaggio’s paintings had opulence, extravagance and heroic sweep! If Caravaggio had all those things, then the commentators could be right in classifying him as Baroque, and this would match Mather’s definition. To prove that either the commentators or Mather are wrong, we need to show that Caravaggio’s paintings lacked those qualities.

Note that E is pretty obviously correct. The first four answers are designed to confuse you and slow you down so you waste 30 seconds before you even read E. Look over all of the answers first before considering any of them at length.

___________

  1. This answer doesn’t apply to the stimulus. We don’t care what’s typically true. We only care about the specific attributes Mather mentioned, and whether Caravaggio’s paintings had them.
    This is a useless, wishy-washy answer. The only purpose of an answer like this is to slow you down and keep you from seeing that E is obviously correct.
  2. The stimulus isn’t about how to define a realistic painting. This answer can’t lead to the conclusion. This is just here to confuse you.
  3. The past doesn’t matter. This argument is only talking about Caravaggio, and Baroque, which was in Caravaggio’s future.
  4. This is close, but we don’t care what “usually” happens in realistic paintings. Caravaggio’s paintings might have been unusual in that they were both realistic but also heroic, opulent and extravagant.
  5. CORRECT. If this is true, then the paintings aren’t Baroque, according to Mather. Yet the commentators say Caravaggio was Baroque. So either they or Mather are wrong.

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. Anthony says

    May 24, 2017 at 2:36 pm

    Does answer choice D also have the mistake of saying “depict the world as opulent, heroic, or extravagant”? They are just three characteristics of Baroque paintings, not necessarily depictions of “the world”.

    Reply
    • TutorLucas (LSAT Hacks) says

      May 24, 2017 at 5:04 pm

      This is an interesting point, but the final sentence of the stimulus does say that to meet Mather’s definition, the paintings must “display opulence, heroic sweep, and extravagance.” For your point to be true, you’d need to come up with a scenario where a painting could display opulence, heroic sweep, and extravagance, without “depicting the world” as opulent, heroic, or extravagant, which would require a lot of mental gymnastics and perhaps a very specific definition of “world”.

      If you find yourself needing to make such jumps on the LSAT, there’s likely a much more glaring issue that an answer is correct or incorrect (as in this case), and it’s better to focus on finding those issues instead.

      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