PrepTest 130, Section 4, Question 12
Sahira: To make a living from their art,(59 more words not shown)
In her argument,(1 more words not shown)
- Adisputes an implicit(3 more words not shown)
- Bpresents independent support(3 more words not shown)
- Caccepts Sahira's conclusion,(9 more words not shown)
- Duses Sahira's premises(10 more words not shown)
- Eargues that a(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Why must popular work be different from an artist's best work? An artist might produce something excellent that also appeals to a wide audience. Sahira's contrast makes me pause before we even reach the subsidy recommendation.
There is a second question we could ask: what makes financial support for artists a government responsibility? Even if artists face a tradeoff, the argument would still need a reason to justify that policy. But we should not confuse our possible objections with the one Rahima actually makes.
What we’re looking for
Rahima challenges the first idea. She says that artists need not sacrifice their best work to gain popular acclaim. The two could go together. Asked to describe her response, we should identify this disputed assumption rather than a new argument about the proper role of government.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Sahira's argument depends on the supposed incompatibility of producing one's best work and gaining widespread acclaim. Rahima challenges that assumption by pointing out that the incompatibility need not hold. Her response undermines the proposed reason for subsidies without having to settle whether subsidies are justified on other grounds.
- B
Rahima disputes the reasoning rather than supporting it. Independent support might be evidence that an existing subsidy program helped artists produce valuable work. Rahima supplies no such evidence; she questions the claimed need to choose between quality and popularity.
- C
Rahima does not say, “Subsidies are justified, but for a different reason.” She neither endorses that conclusion nor offers an alternative argument for it. Criticizing Sahira's support does not tell us Rahima's final position on subsidies.
- D
Rahima challenges a claim underlying Sahira's reasoning. She does not accept Sahira's premises and use them to derive a different policy conclusion. Her point is that the supposed tradeoff need not exist.
- E
An unsupported assumption is not necessarily a contradiction. To show a contradiction, Rahima would need to identify claims that cannot both be true—for example, that an artist's best work can never be popular and that the same artist's best work is popular. She does not accuse Sahira of asserting both. She simply disputes the first kind of claim.
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.