PrepTest 129

Incorrect. The argument assumes that the "component" styles having characteristics will impart those characteristics onto a combo architectural style, but it doesn't assume that this is the only way for that to happen ("must have").

Incorrect. The argument doesn't assume that being dramatic is postmodern architecture's "most salient" feature—just that it's a feature that would carry through to a combo architectural style. The argument says that the style is dramatic "primarily" for a certain reason, but that's different from saying that the dramatic nature is the primary feature.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Classical Roman architecture - Beautiful
Postmodern architecture - Dramatic
Therefore - Classical Roman Postmodern architecture would be beautiful and dramatic

Answer Anticipation:
This argument brings up two individual styles that have specific characteristics, and then it concludes that putting those styles together would result in a new style that has both of the characteristics.

That's not how things work!

Putting these styles together might result in a new style that doesn't have the characteristics of the styles that went into it. The characteristics of the individual styles might interact in a way that creates new characteristics, or the characteristics of one style might "take over."

Let's look for an answer saying that the individual elements that are blended together don't necessarily bring their characteristics along with them. This is a variation of a Part vs. Whole flaw, so we can look for answers that describe that flaw, as well as answers that get into the details of this argument specifically.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights that a combo architectural style might lack some of the characteristics of the styles that went into making it. Just as a bear in a tutu won't necessarily be graceful, mixing things together into a new whole doesn't guarantee the characteristics of the parts will carry through.

Key Takeaway:
Whenever two things are "mixed" together, there's a chance that the characteristics of the individual elements don't translate to the whole. This is one way that a Part vs. Whole flaw can show up on the LSAT.

Incorrect. The conclusion is that the new architectural style will be both dramatic and beautiful, not that the drama will make it beautiful.

Incorrect. If anything, there being styles that are both dramatic and beautiful aligns with the argument, showing it's possible to have a dramatic and beautiful architectural style and thus this specific combination might have both characteristics.