QUESTION TEXT: Theorist: Hatred and anger, grief and despair…
QUESTION TYPE: Role in Argument
CONCLUSION: If the meaning of a piece of music is emotion, that means that music produced only the core of that emotion.
REASONING: Music is only sound. It doesn’t create the social conditions or behavior. (social conditions cause emotion, and emotions cause behavior)
ANALYSIS: This is an unusually dense argument. Damned if I know what it means. (I know what the words mean, but I don’t think they refer to real, true things.)
You don’t need to understand “role in argument” question, at least not fully. More important is figuring out the goal of the author’s argument, and noting structural words. Here, there are four structural words, highlighted below:
“So, even if the…., this can mean only that music produces….., for music is….., therefore, by itself….”
- So: This bit is a preamble for the conclusion.
- This can mean only that: what follows this is the conclusion
- For: The thing before “for” was the conclusion
- Therefore: Normally indicates a conclusion. In this case, since it’s after “for”, this indicates a subsidiary conclusion that is supported by evidence and supports the conclusion.
The statement in question comes after “for”, so it’s evidence.
Example of answer: Dogs are cute. Fluffy the dog is especially cute. Fluffy’s existence undermine’s Dan’s argument that all pets are ugly.
- “Music is merely sound” comes after “for”, and this means the statement is evidence, not a conclusion.
- CORRECT. The statement comes after “for”, which indicates that it’s evidence. It’s not the only evidence, which is why this answer says “partial”.
- No, this is entirely different.
Example of answer: I believe that cities are great. This is because all buildings are great [Note: generalization], and cities have lots of buildings. I think this claim about buildings is necessary to prove that cities are great.
- Didn’t happen.
Example of answer: Some say that leprechauns plant gold at the ends of rainbows. But conclusive research has shown that rainbows don’t actually have ends. So the leprechaun theory must be discarded.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly