Logical reasoning PrepTest 140 · Section 2 · Question 26

Incorrect. There's no claim about what most people appreciate, just that people must appreciate something other than an exact replica of the scene depicted, so this answer doesn't describe the argument correctly.

Incorrect. The argument doesn't defend tastes, it just discusses them, so this answer misses the mark.

Incorrect. While the failure of photography to supplant painting is a historical fact, that fact is used as support for a conclusion about what people appreciate, not the other way around.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Valid

Question Type:
Methods of Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
If people only appreciated paintings that are exact replicas of reality, then photography would have replaced painting. It hasn't, so people must appreciate more than that.

Answer Anticipation:
The stimulus starts by discussing what some people may do, highlighting that initial section as an opposing point. The author then pivots to a judgment about people—they appreciate things in paintings other than an exact recreation of what is being painted. Why?

That's where a relatively tricky LSAT word comes in—"otherwise." This word describes the situation when whatever was just stated doesn't happen. That's how we ended up with the opening conditional in our summary—if the preceding sentence isn't true (people just like exact replicas), then there's an implication (photography would have replaced painting). Since that implication didn't come to pass, by the contrapositive, the "otherwise" clause can't be true, supporting the main point of the argument.

Let's find an answer that reflects this structure—the argument appeals to the failure of an implication of a belief from coming to pass to support that the belief isn't true.

Answer Explanation:
This answer is very much the reverse of (C), which makes it the correct answer. The historical fact that photography hasn't replaced painting supports the conclusion about what people appreciate in paintings.

Key Takeaway:
Some Methods of Reasoning questions will get more specific than your anticipation; some less so. Here, there were elements of the correct answer that were more specific (discussing historical fact and artistic preferences) and some that were less so (it didn't go into the whole otherwise/false implication structure). The goal of the Anticipation is to get you in the right ballpark so you can dig deeper into the answers that align with it.

Incorrect. The argument discusses the historical preferences of people, but it doesn't defend them, so this answer fails to describe the stimulus.