PrepTest 109, Section 4, Question 3
Muriel: I admire Favilla's novels, but she does(65 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- Awhether Favilla has(9 more words not shown)
- Bwhether Favilla should(10 more words not shown)
- Cwhether treating a(15 more words not shown)
- Dwhether the number(18 more words not shown)
- Ewhether there are(16 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Why must a great writer cover lots of different subjects? Someone could explore one subject exceptionally well. That's the question Muriel's criticism raises.
Muriel likes Favilla's novels but withholds the label “great” because their subject matter isn't varied enough. John challenges that standard. He says variety isn't required; the ability to explore a theme deeply is.
What we’re looking for
Notice what John hasn't said. He hasn't told us whether Favilla explores themes deeply or whether he considers her a great writer. His disagreement is about the test Muriel uses, not necessarily her final verdict on this particular novelist. For the point at issue, I'd predict: must someone treat a variety of subjects to qualify as a great writer?
Working the answers
- A
John doesn't dispute Muriel's description of Favilla's subjects. He could agree that her novels cover a narrow range and still reject using that fact to rule out greatness. The dispute concerns whether variety is required, not whether Favilla has it.
- B
John doesn't discuss her distinctive style or say that it makes her great. He names the ability to explore a theme deeply as a requirement. We can't substitute distinctiveness for that requirement or infer an endorsement of Favilla from his disagreement with Muriel's criterion.
- CCorrect
A prerequisite is something a person must have to qualify. Muriel treats variety as a prerequisite: Favilla lacks enough variety, so she isn't great. John explicitly says a great writer doesn't need diversity in subject matter. That gives us a clear yes and no on the same requirement.
- D
Neither speaker uses the number of novels as a standard. Writing many novels isn't the same as writing about many subjects; an author could publish twenty books on one theme. D replaces their disagreement about variety with a different proposed measure.
- E
We have no disagreement about how many novelists receive undeserved praise. Muriel discusses Favilla, and John challenges a standard for greatness. Neither estimates the number of overrated writers. Their remarks could remain exactly the same whether that number were large or small.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.