PrepTest 136

Incorrect. There's no claim that music is inferior to all other arts. While the author may imply that most great music isn't great art, that's not a statement that would allow such a broad comparison.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Valid

Question Type:
Main Point

Stimulus Summary:
Famous artist - Great art → Imitates nature
Implication - If correct → Music that is great art would imitate nature
Pivot - Most great music doesn't imitate anything (i.e., it doesn't imitate nature)
Conclusion - (???)

Answer Anticipation:
This argument has an interesting structure—right down to those question marks on the conclusion!

Reading through this, it starts with what will almost certainly end up being an opposing point—what the famous artist said. The second sentence feels like a conclusion, but the argument ends up pivoting away from that statement ("But . . . "), so that second sentence is an implication of the artist's statement ("If this claim is correct")—in other words, it's the conclusion of the opposing point.

The argument pivots to a concession ("while . . . ") before hitting on the main rebuttal—most great music doesn't imitate nature. However, it never takes the final step of stating the conclusion, so we'll have to do some work to figure it out!

Since the final statement is a rebuttal of the implication, we should go back and see what the rebuttal means for the implication—that music that is great art would imitate nature. Since the author has established that great music doesn't imitate nature, one of two things Must Be True—either the famous artist isn't correct (great music is great art and doesn't imitate nature, so the principle is wrong) or this great music that doesn't imitate nature isn't great art.

Answer Explanation:
This answer reflects the two possibilities based on the rebuttal by the author. If great music doesn't follow the artist's rule for great art, then either the artist is wrong or great music isn't great art.

Key Takeaway:
While rare, the LSAT does include implied conclusions sometimes. This tends to only happen when the argument features a direct rebuttal of an opposing point ("But . . . ") or when it rebuts a conditional/principle and so the logic can be clearly analyzed in the context of the rebuttal.

Incorrect. The argument doesn't mention any other types of art, so this isn't supported.

Incorrect. There's no discussion of elements of nature that can't be represented in great art—the only examples of specific elements of nature we get are ones that some music does imitate.

Incorrect. The author states that most great music imitates nothing at all—including nature—so this answer is contradicted.