PrepTest 107, Section 3, Question 20
Pieces of music consist of sounds and silences(69 more words not shown)
The reasoning in the argument(3 more words not shown)
- Athe argument does(20 more words not shown)
- Bthe argument is(17 more words not shown)
- Cthe argument fails(19 more words not shown)
- Drelying on the(25 more words not shown)
- Ethe absence of(17 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
“Temporal” means related to time. Music unfolds over time: one sound or silence comes before another. A painting doesn't require us to look at its parts in one fixed order. We might start in the upper-left corner, move to the center, then inspect a detail on the right.
So far, that distinction makes sense. But how did we get from no required order to no time dimension at all?
Looking at a painting can take a few seconds or much longer. We still move through the experience over time, even if we choose our own route. Two people could look at the same painting in different orders, and both could have a sequence of things they notice. The absence of a prescribed sequence doesn't remove the experience of a sequence.
What we’re looking for
I might also ask what makes the distinction “essential,” but the more concrete problem is the claim that viewing a painting has no temporal dimension. For the flaw question, I want an answer pointing out that freedom to choose a path isn't the same as following no path at all.
Working the answers
- A
Being unaware of time passing doesn't establish that the experience has no time dimension. Someone could be absorbed in a painting while their eyes move through it over several minutes. The argument doesn't depend on ruling out that absorption. Our objection concerns the time involved in viewing, not whether the viewer consciously tracks it.
- B
The argument uses a broad description of music, but it doesn't need a catalogue of musical styles to make the stated comparison. B does not explain how differences among styles undermine the move from no fixed viewing order to no temporal dimension. A general description is not automatically a defective one.
- C
The author does not list everything music and painting share, such as creativity or artistic expression. But an argument identifying a difference doesn't have to list every similarity. The problem is whether this particular claimed difference follows from the evidence. C points to an omission without explaining why it undermines that inference.
- D
Calling the experience “reading” a painting doesn't assume that it lacks a temporal dimension. We can use that metaphor and still think that our eyes move from one feature to another over time. The metaphor does not smuggle the conclusion into the premise; the unsupported step occurs when the author moves from no mandatory path to no time dimension.
- ECorrect
No particular path is required, but the eye can still follow a path. You might notice a face first and the background afterward; another viewer might do the opposite. Each experience still unfolds over time.
The evidence allows different viewing sequences. It does not establish that there is no sequence or temporal dimension to viewing at all. E identifies that exact gap.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.