LR Drill Set 11, Question 4
Journalist: Those of us acquainted with the work(37 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AIt fails to(9 more words not shown)
- BIt fails to(13 more words not shown)
- CIts claim that(17 more words not shown)
- DIt fails to(11 more words not shown)
- EIt fails to(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Watching someone's films doesn't show you that person's tax returns.
I could be an enormous fan of a director, familiar with every film, and still know nothing about the director's finances. So the journalist's confidence already seems to come from the wrong place. Familiarity with the art isn't the same as evidence about financial conduct.
The offered reason is that Dowland's work shows honesty and integrity. Let's grant that description of the films. Could an artist make sincere, uncompromising work and still be dishonest about money? Of course. Those things concern different parts of the person's life.
What we’re looking for
The flaw question asks us to identify that gap. The journalist needs a reason why artistic honesty rules out personal financial dishonesty. Without that connection, the admired qualities of the films don't establish that the accusations are baseless. We don't have to show the accusations are true to see that this defense doesn't settle them.
Working the answers
- A
We don't need dictionary definitions to see the problem. Even with perfectly clear definitions, the journalist would still need to show that honesty expressed in art guarantees honesty in financial dealings. A complaint about undefined words doesn't identify that missing connection.
- B
This says honest artists must produce honest art. The argument relies on the other direction: because the art is honest, the artist cannot be financially dishonest. Showing that honest art is required for an honest artist would not establish that producing such art is enough to prove personal honesty.
- C
Uncommercial art might still produce taxable profits. But having taxable profits doesn't establish tax fraud: someone can report them honestly. Conversely, the conclusion addresses financial dishonesty more broadly than the success of these films. C challenges a possible claim about earnings rather than the key move from artistic qualities to personal conduct.
- D
Dowland could have other commercial ventures, but commercial activity isn't itself dishonest. The journalist's defense would still need a connection between honesty in art and honesty in financial affairs, whether those affairs involve films or other businesses. Listing another possible source of income doesn't identify that connection.
- ECorrect
The journalist assumes artistic honesty and personal dishonesty cannot coexist. That is why the films' integrity is supposed to dispose of the accusations.
But imagine Dowland creates art with complete sincerity and then deliberately misreports income. Nothing we've been told about the art prevents that combination. The journalist has offered evidence about artistic expression and treated it as a guarantee about unrelated financial behavior. E identifies that unsupported assumption.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.