PrepTest 109, Section 1, Question 2
Sheila: It has been argued that using computer(106 more words not shown)
Sheila's argument uses which one(6 more words not shown)
- AIt appeals to(5 more words not shown)
- BIt offers a(5 more words not shown)
- CIt appeals to(7 more words not shown)
- DIt distinguishes facts(3 more words not shown)
- EIt draws an(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Adding color changes the version we're watching. Does it damage the original film, though? If the black-and-white version still exists, people could choose the version they want. Producing another version needn't erase the first one.
Sheila makes her case by comparing that change with turning a book into a movie. A film adaptation is its own work: a viewer might dislike the film while still appreciating the book. Sheila wants us to treat a colorized movie the same way. Judge the new version on its own rather than treating it as damage to the original.
What we’re looking for
We could question that comparison. Is changing the colors of a film relevantly similar to adapting a book for the screen? Perhaps there are differences that matter. But the question asks how Sheila argues, not whether the comparison ultimately succeeds. Her method is to use one supposedly similar case to support a judgment about the other.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The two cases are a book adapted into a film and a black-and-white film turned into a colorized version. Sheila says the first produces an independent work that does not damage its source, then extends that reasoning to the second.
That is an analogy. Calling it an analogy doesn't require us to accept that the cases are alike in every respect. It describes the comparison Sheila relies on.
- B
A counterexample would show a broad claim failing in a particular case. If someone said every adaptation damages its source, we could challenge that with an adaptation that doesn't. Sheila instead compares two types of transformation to argue that what we accept about one should also apply to the other. That comparison, rather than a specific exception to a stated general rule, drives her argument.
- C
Sheila says no one objects to adaptations on this particular ground, but she doesn't simply say colorization is acceptable because most people favor it. She uses the accepted treatment of adaptations to build a comparison. We aren't given a poll or majority view establishing what people think of colorized movies themselves.
- D
A fact-versus-value distinction might separate “the original was filmed in black and white” from someone's judgment that adding color harms its artistic integrity. Sheila doesn't resolve the dispute by classifying one claim as a fact and another as a judgment. She argues that the new work can stand apart from the old, using the book-to-film comparison.
- E
Sheila doesn't start with a general rule covering all new versions of existing works and then apply it to a particular film. She starts with another kind of case, adaptations, and reasons that colorization should receive similar treatment. That is why A describes her method more precisely.
More Strategy of Argument questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strategy of Argument questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.