PrepTest 153, Section 3, Question 19
Most movie critics believe that sentimentality detracts from(61 more words not shown)
The reasoning in the argument(6 more words not shown)
- Ais based solely(6 more words not shown)
- Brejects a position(14 more words not shown)
- Ctakes a necessary(16 more words not shown)
- Dconcludes that a(14 more words not shown)
- Etakes what is(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
I usually think of sentimentality as something like being attached to a childhood toy. In a movie, perhaps it shows up as familiar characters and scenes that remind us of earlier films. Imagine a new installment spending more time bringing back beloved characters than developing a good story. I can see why a critic might question whether those callbacks improve the movie.
The author says the critics are wrong, but gives a story about their tastes. They've seen so much sentimentality that its absence feels refreshing. On that account, a less sentimental movie seems better because it is different from what they usually watch.
Maybe that explains their reaction. Does it show that their judgment is false?
Think through the food comparison. Someone who gets the same seasoning at every meal may be tired of it and enjoy a change. That doesn't prove the seasoning makes food worse. But explaining the person's boredom doesn't prove that their complaint about the food is wrong either. We still need to consider the food, rather than treat its familiarity as an answer about its quality.
What we’re looking for
That's the flaw here. The author moves from how critics came to hold their view to a rejection of the view itself. The two can come apart: we could correctly explain the origin of their criticism and still need to ask whether sentimentality actually hurts the films.
Working the answers
- A
An appeal to authority would use someone's judgment as support, such as 'a famous director says the critics are wrong, so they are wrong.' This author does not supply an expert to settle the issue. The attempted refutation concerns the critics' own experience and how it shaped their view.
- B
A hidden agenda would be different. Imagine independent filmmakers attacking popular movies because they want people to buy tickets to their own films. That would give them a separate interest behind the criticism. Here, the author describes critics becoming accustomed to sentimentality and preferring something different. That is an account of how they developed their tastes, not an accusation of a concealed motive.
- C
This would turn a required feature of a good movie into a guarantee of goodness. We are never given an argument such as 'a good movie needs this feature, so any movie with it must be good.' The author tries to discredit the critics through the origin of their opinion, not by reversing a requirement for quality.
- DCorrect
Frequent exposure to sentimentality supposedly explains why the critics reject it. Even if that explanation is accurate, it doesn't settle whether their criticism is accurate. A person can arrive at a true view through the experience the author describes. To establish falsity, the author needs more than an account of how the view arose.
- E
This would take one way of reducing a work's quality and treat it as the only way. The author doesn't argue that sentimentality, or anything else, is required for a work to lose quality. The issue is the attempted rejection of the critics' view based on how they formed it.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.