PrepTest 152, Section 1, Question 24
Andy Warhol's Brillo Boxes is a stack of(60 more words not shown)
The argument proceeds(1 more words not shown)
- Ahighlighting the differences(17 more words not shown)
- Bdemonstrating that an(6 more words not shown)
- Csuggesting that two(14 more words not shown)
- Dquestioning the assumptions(4 more words not shown)
- Eshowing that something(13 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
They look the same, but only one is treated as art. Then looks can't be the whole explanation.
What we’re looking for
That reasoning makes sense. Perhaps the circumstances of creation matter, or perhaps something else distinguishes how people classify the two stacks. We don't have to identify the extra factor to see that appearance alone can't account for different classifications of visually identical objects. For the method question, hold on to that simple comparison; the challenge will be recognizing it in more abstract wording.
Working the answers
- A
The argument doesn't contrast what people believe is art with what really is art. It compares two things that are considered differently despite looking identical. It never settles an objective standard of true art or accuses people of misclassifying one of the stacks.
- B
We aren't shown an opposing argument that shifts between different meanings of a term. The issue isn't ambiguity in 'box' or 'art.' It is that the same appearance accompanies different classifications, which defeats the proposed appearance-only explanation.
- C
This would make visually indistinguishable objects belong to the same category. The argument starts from the opposite fact: the identical-looking stacks are not both considered works of art. It uses that difference to show that something besides appearance matters.
- D
The author doesn't inspect assumptions supporting a theory and question whether those assumptions are justified. The argument presents a concrete situation that an appearance-only theory couldn't accommodate. E describes that direct test more accurately.
- ECorrect
The abstract wording takes a moment to unpack. The thesis is that appearance alone entirely determines whether something is considered art. If that were right, two visually indistinguishable stacks would have to receive the same classification. It would be impossible for appearance alone to make one art and the other not art when their appearances are the same.
But that different classification is exactly what the passage gives us. The observed example therefore defeats the appearance-only thesis. We don't need to know the additional factor to know that there must be more to the classification than looks.
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.