PrepTest 137, Section 2, Question 14
Drama critic: There were many interesting plays written(68 more words not shown)
The argument relies on assuming(5 more words not shown)
- ANo play will(17 more words not shown)
- BFor a play(16 more words not shown)
- CThere were no(14 more words not shown)
- DIf a play(12 more words not shown)
- EAny play that(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
How can the critic know that none of last year's plays will be popular centuries from now?
The offered rule concerns something narrower: being performed regularly through the intervening decades and centuries. Only plays that skillfully explore human nature maintain that performance history, and last year's plays lack that skill. So those plays won't be performed regularly throughout that time.
But is that the same as never becoming popular centuries later? Imagine a play largely disappearing from theaters and then being rediscovered by a later generation. It could become popular then without having been performed regularly in between. The critic needs to close that gap.
What we’re looking for
For the necessary assumption, connect future popularity to continued regular performance. Otherwise the evidence about performance history doesn't establish the prediction about popularity.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
This makes continued regular performance a requirement for popularity several centuries from now. The evidence already rules out that regular performance for last year's plays. With A's connection, the critic can move from ‘they won't keep being performed regularly’ to ‘they won't be popular then.’ Without it, a later revival remains possible.
- B
Critical acclaim isn't the conclusion we're trying to establish. The critic even allows that some of these plays will receive high acclaim. A rule about which plays deserve acclaim doesn't connect their future popularity to their performance history.
- C
The critic doesn't have to have personally read or seen every play to make the argument. Information could come from other sources. More importantly, we're given the claim that last year's plays lack the relevant skill; the gap concerns what follows from that claim, not whether the critic conducted an exhaustive personal survey.
- D
This connects skill at exploring human nature with critical acclaim. The argument's conclusion concerns popularity centuries later. It also explicitly allows that some plays lacking the skill will receive acclaim, so this isn't a condition the argument needs to accept.
- E
This says skillful exploration guarantees regular performance. The given rule only says such skill is needed for regular performance. We don't need to add the guarantee to rule out regular performance for plays that lack the skill. And E still doesn't connect performance history to popularity centuries later.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.