PrepTest 157, Section 2, Question 23
Filmmaker: I use hidden cameras when filming documentaries,(49 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(10 more words not shown)
- AA documentary with(15 more words not shown)
- BA documentary can(15 more words not shown)
- CMakers of documentaries(18 more words not shown)
- DThe more authentically(10 more words not shown)
- ESubjects of documentaries(12 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Would a more natural scene necessarily make a better documentary?
I might learn more from a historian speaking directly to the camera than from watching people go about an ordinary day. Natural behavior could be interesting, but it could also be dull or uninformative. We need a connection between authenticity and being worthwhile, not just a preference for one filming style.
There's an earlier point worth pausing over too. The filmmaker says people behave differently when aware of filming, then says the subjects know a camera is present but act naturally because its location is hidden. Knowing a camera exists and knowing where it is aren't identical. Still, the filmmaker hasn't carefully explained why the former awareness no longer changes behavior. For the main inference, however, we can grant the claimed natural behavior and still ask why that makes the documentaries more worthwhile.
What we’re looking for
The principle question asks us to strengthen that inference. I'd look for a rule that values more authentic portrayals more highly. Keep the conclusion in view: we're comparing how worthwhile documentaries are, not deciding whether the filming is ethical or whether a film qualifies as a documentary.
Working the answers
- A
A documentary can be legitimate without being more worthwhile than another documentary. This permits authentic depiction as a valid purpose, but the filmmaker claims a comparative advantage. A doesn't rank the films in the way the conclusion requires.
- B
This makes excluding direct-to-camera speech a requirement for authenticity. Even if that helps distinguish the filmmaker's method from others, we still need to know why greater authenticity makes a documentary more worthwhile. B never connects those two evaluations.
- C
The filmmaker might have no moral duty to reveal camera locations, and the resulting documentary could still be less worthwhile than a filmed interview. This answers a possible ethical concern about the method, not the argument's claim about the value of its results.
- DCorrect
The more authentically a documentary depicts its subjects, the more worthwhile it is. The filmmaker presents the hidden-camera method as capturing natural behavior, unlike people speaking directly to the camera. D supplies the missing evaluative connection: a more authentic portrayal counts in favor of a more worthwhile documentary. It directly supports the comparison the filmmaker wants to make.
- E
This tells subjects not to search for the cameras. It doesn't tell us why natural behavior, even if that instruction helps preserve it, makes a documentary more worthwhile. A rule governing the subjects' conduct isn't the rule evaluating the films that we need.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.