Logical reasoning PrepTest 130 · Section 1 · Question 12

Incorrect. This answer is a bit of a negation of the statement establishing art's purpose. Additionally, since this edifice has caused a debate, this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. The conclusion is that this edifice is art, so a premise establishing that it can't be determined if something is art is almost certainly wrong.

Incorrect. The argument never takes that last step of recommending the purchase of the stone edifice, so this answer choice is out of scope. Even if it's implied that the City Councilperson would support the purchase (which isn't the case here), it's never stated and so justifying that conclusion doesn't justify this argument.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Sufficient Premise

Stimulus Summary:
The purpose of art is to get people to debate, and this edifice has done it, so it's art.

Answer Anticipation:
Why is this edifice art? Because it serves the purpose of art. Is serving the purpose of something enough to guarantee it is that thing? Not at all! You can sleep on the ground but that doesn't make it a bed. This argument assumes that anything that serves the purpose of art is art, but that's an assumption—one that should be reflected in the correct answer.

Answer Explanation:
This answer choice justifies the conclusion. Since the edifice has stirred debate, and stirring debate is the purpose of art, this edifice serves the purpose of art. If anything serving that purpose is art, then this edifice is art, as the conclusion states.

Key Takeaway:
Purpose is similar to motive, so when you see it raised on the LSAT, there's a good chance that it's going to be relevant to the correct answer.

Incorrect. Similar to (C), the argument never takes the last step of recommending for or against the purchase of this edifice, so this answer is out of scope.