PrepTest 110, Section 2, Question 21
Professor Chan: The literature department's undergraduate courses should(71 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- ATexts that are(10 more words not shown)
- BCourses offered by(14 more words not shown)
- CStudents who take(21 more words not shown)
- DForms of advertising(16 more words not shown)
- EThe literature department's(13 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
There may be something valuable to learn from advertisements. If their messages are hard to understand and that misunderstanding harms society, helping students analyze those messages sounds useful. The literature department already teaches students to analyze texts, so Wigmore sees an opportunity to put those skills to work.
But what exactly is the department responsible for? Having the skills to help doesn't settle the limits of its job. Is it supposed to study every written text? Every text that harms society? Or is its teaching responsibility narrower than that?
What we’re looking for
We're looking for an assumption Wigmore needs. I don't have an exact sentence in mind yet, but I'd focus on the move from the department's useful skills to its responsibility to include advertisements. Wigmore leaves open whether advertisements are true literary works, so the proposed duty has to make sense even without resolving that classification.
Working the answers
- A
Wigmore doesn't need true literary works to be harmless. A novel might also have a detrimental effect on society. That wouldn't remove the proposed reason for studying advertisements. The argument gives a reason to include one kind of material; it doesn't need every other kind to lack the same problem.
- B
Why would the department need to be unable to teach both? A course could analyze a novel and an advertisement, and that would be perfectly compatible with Wigmore's proposal. The argument doesn't depend on a restriction that prevents these materials from appearing together.
- C
Learning other skills wouldn't interfere with this argument. Students might learn about history or develop their writing as well as learning to analyze texts. Wigmore needs the relevant analytical skills to support the proposed use of them; those don't have to be the only skills the courses provide.
- D
The argument doesn't depend on advertisements made entirely of images being harmless. Those advertisements could be harmful too. That wouldn't eliminate the reason to study the advertisements that the department's text-analysis skills can help students understand. The choice adds a claim about a different form of advertising that Wigmore doesn't need.
- ECorrect
Wigmore argues for studying advertisements whether or not they turn out to be true literary works. That argument needs room for the department's responsibilities to extend beyond teaching the analysis of true literary works.
Suppose the department's responsibility were strictly limited to that category. Then showing that advertisements are harmful and worth understanding would not be enough. Wigmore would still have to establish that they are true literary works, a question the argument explicitly leaves open. E removes that restriction. It doesn't say the department must teach every possible text, but it provides the broader scope of responsibility this argument needs.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.