PrepTest 118

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/Flawed

Question Type:
Point at Issue

Stimulus Summary:
R: Great art requires external constraint, so contemporary art free of prior constraints is lower quality.

J: Bad old art is forgotten, leaving only the good stuff. Since people still remember bad new art, they wrongly believe modern art is worse than earlier art.

Answer Anticipation:
James subtly throws an opinion word into his argument that highlights his feelings towards the quality of modern art—people "mistakenly" think that it's lower quality. These adverbs that highlight viewpoint are commonly used by the LSAT to sneak an opinion into an argument, and they frequently lead to the correct answer (especially in RC). Using that as a guide, we can dig in here to see if Rachel disagrees with James' view that modern aren't isn't inferior to earlier art, and she does. She states that something has "caused a decline" in the quality of modern art. The correct answer should highlight this point at issue.

Answer Explanation:
Rachel believes this is the case—she states that the freedom from external constraints has resulted in a "decline in the quality" of modern art. James, however, thinks that people "mistakenly" believe contemporary art is inferior to earlier art, showing he disagrees with this statement.

Key Takeaway:
Adverb clues to opinions are one sneaky way that the LSAT will establish a viewpoint without clearer and unambiguous statements of opinion. This is commonly used in RC, where the only hint as to the author's viewpoint will be a "Hopefully" or "Thankfully" starting a sentence, but don't neglect to be on the lookout for it in LR, as well.

Incorrect. While Rachel states that they aren't bound by the same constraints, James doesn't mention these constraints at all, so this answer is out of scope of his argument.

Incorrect. This answer reflects Rachel's last premise, but it's out of scope of James' argument, who never talks about limitations.

Incorrect. James establishes this, but Rachel doesn't mention anything about works of art being forgotten or not, so it's out of scope of her argument.

Incorrect. Neither Rachel nor James agrees (or disagrees with this). While James may believe that people have a hard time assessing the overall quality of art produced contemporaneously compared to earlier eras, he doesn't say that people can't assess the quality of individual works (and, in fact, in stating that people can tell some works are inferior, it's implied that he believes it's possible to assess quality of individual works).