PrepTest 123, Section 3, Question 3
Carolyn: The artist Marc Quinn has displayed, behind(54 more words not shown)
The dialogue provides most support(23 more words not shown)
- Ashould be considered(3 more words not shown)
- Bshould be considered(4 more words not shown)
- Cbears a recognizable(3 more words not shown)
- Dcontains instructions according(5 more words not shown)
- Eis actually a(3 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
DNA behind glass is a portrait? When I hear “portrait,” I picture something in which I can recognize the person. Looking at fragments of DNA wouldn't let me recognize Sulston that way. So I can see Carolyn's objection: she thinks a portrait has to bear a recognizable resemblance to its subject.
Arnold sees it differently. The DNA contains the instructions according to which Sulston was created, so Arnold calls it a maximally realistic portrait. He isn't just praising it as an interesting exhibit. He's defending its status as a portrait.
What we’re looking for
I might find Carolyn's use of the word more natural, but choosing a side isn't our job. The question asks where their positions conflict. Put it as a yes-or-no question: “Is this actually a portrait of Sulston?” Carolyn's reasoning says no; Arnold explicitly says yes. That's a disagreement we can establish without deciding what should count as a portrait ourselves.
Working the answers
- A
Art is broader than portraiture. Carolyn could think this is art while denying that it's a portrait. Arnold's defense of it as a portrait doesn't show that Carolyn rejects its status as art. We'd need a no from one speaker and a yes from the other, and we don't have them here.
- B
No one claims another artist made the work. The dispute concerns what kind of work Quinn has produced, not whether it should be credited to him.
- C
This is tempting because recognizable resemblance is central to Carolyn's objection. But does Arnold say the displayed DNA looks recognizably like Sulston? No. He says it contains the instructions according to which Sulston was created.
Those instructions can be his reason for calling it a portrait without being a claim that someone can recognize Sulston by looking at it. Arnold may reject Carolyn's requirement for a portrait, rather than claim that the exhibit meets that requirement. Don't turn a disagreement about what counts as a portrait into an unsupported disagreement about its visible resemblance.
- D
Arnold says it contains those instructions. Where does Carolyn deny that? She objects to calling it a portrait because she requires a recognizable resemblance. She can accept that it contains Sulston's DNA and still make that objection. There is no supported clash over the instructions.
- ECorrect
This is the direct conflict. Carolyn's requirement excludes the exhibit from being a portrait; Arnold expressly calls it a maximally realistic portrait. They offer different reasons, but those reasons lead them to opposite answers about whether the exhibit really is a portrait of Sulston.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.