to the top

#17 - It is the mark of a superior conductor that he or she

Administrator
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 6576
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:19 pm
Points: 3,249

Complete Question Explanation

Assumption. The correct answer choice is (D)

In this stimulus the conclusion is the opening sentence, which is a characteristic of "superior" conductors. In order to be considered "superior" a conductor must be have the authority to insist on more intense practice. She can only get this authority, according to the last sentence, if the orchestra respects her artistic interpretation of the current piece. Apply the Negate and Destory technique to the answer choices and see which answer destroys this argument.


Answer Choice (A): This answer choice is incorrect because when it is negated it does not have an affect on the argument. Whether or not the conductors devise different interpretations does not relate to the argument at hand because the argument mentions specifically "the current piece."

Answer Choice (B): This answer choice is incorrect because it is also unrelated to the argument at hand. Negated, it does not affect the argument. Whether or not the conductors are satisfied is irrelevant; the argument is concerned with how the orchestra views her.

Answer Choice (C): This answer choice is incorrect because it does not affect the stimulus when negated. The argument says the conductor has the authority "to insist" on extra practice. Therefore, if top orchestras are not ready, then the conductor must not be superior. It does not destroy the argument.

Answer Choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. If we negate this answer and say that top orchestras cannot appreciate the merits of interpretation before full realization, then how can a conductor ever win their respect? The two idea are contradictory: the conductor can only insist on extra practice if the orchestra appreciates his finished work. Negated, this answer choice destroys the argument.

Answer Choice (E): This answer choice is incorrect because it does not destroy the argument when negated. If top orchestras are always led by superior conductors, it does not affect the logic about what gives a conductor the authority that makes him "superior."
Nfontes93
LSAT Apprentice
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2015 12:19 pm
Points: 4

This question really has me stuck! I pick D, but only through POE; on its own, I don't really understand why it is the correct answer. Can someone explain this to me?

"It is the mark of a superior conductor that he or she has the authority to insist, even with a top orchestra, that rehearsal work must be intensified..." [Remainder of question content removed in order to comply with LSAC copyright restrictions.]
Clay Cooper
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 3:30 pm
Points: 103

Hi NFontes,

Thanks for your question, it is a good one.

Answer choice D is correct because the author's argument doesn't make any sense unless one assumes that the orchestra can know, while still rehearsing, whether what they are rehearsing will be any good.

The author asserts that the authority of a top conductor cannot simply be claimed, but instead that it develops when an orchestra respects the conductor for the quality of the artistic interpretations he or she is currently pursuing; however, if answer choice D were not true and and it were the case that this orchestra cannot predict the quality of those interpretations before the rehearsal becomes a finished performance, this claim (about where the conductor derives there authority) would be absurd.

Thus, the negated form of answer choice D becomes a powerful attack on the author's argument about how conductors earn authority.
Lawyered
LSAT Apprentice
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 12:27 pm
Points: 25

Can someone explain the Negate and Destroy Technique?

Do we negate the conclusion and destroy anything to the contrary?

Seems like we negate the answer choices and the one that's most incorrect/faulty to our stem is the right one???


Administrator wrote:Complete Question Explanation

Assumption. The correct answer choice is (D)

In this stimulus the conclusion is the opening sentence, which is a characteristic of "superior" conductors. In order to be considered "superior" a conductor must be have the authority to insist on more intense practice. She can only get this authority, according to the last sentence, if the orchestra respects her artistic interpretation of the current piece. Apply the Negate and Destory technique to the answer choices and see which answer destroys this argument.


Answer Choice (A): This answer choice is incorrect because when it is negated it does not have an affect on the argument. Whether or not the conductors devise different interpretations does not relate to the argument at hand because the argument mentions specifically "the current piece."

Answer Choice (B): This answer choice is incorrect because it is also unrelated to the argument at hand. Negated, it does not affect the argument. Whether or not the conductors are satisfied is irrelevant; the argument is concerned with how the orchestra views her.

Answer Choice (C): This answer choice is incorrect because it does not affect the stimulus when negated. The argument says the conductor has the authority "to insist" on extra practice. Therefore, if top orchestras are not ready, then the conductor must not be superior. It does not destroy the argument.

Answer Choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. If we negate this answer and say that top orchestras cannot appreciate the merits of interpretation before full realization, then how can a conductor ever win their respect? The two idea are contradictory: the conductor can only insist on extra practice if the orchestra appreciates his finished work. Negated, this answer choice destroys the argument.

Answer Choice (E): This answer choice is incorrect because it does not destroy the argument when negated. If top orchestras are always led by superior conductors, it does not affect the logic about what gives a conductor the authority that makes him "superior."
Alexandra Ruby
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 9:46 am
Points: 15

HI Lawyered,

Yes, you are correct. You negate the answer choice, not the conclusion in the stimulus, and then plug the negated answer choice into the stimulus. If it destroys the argument, then that is the correct answer choice.

But it's really better practice not to go through all five answer choices using this technique. Rather, narrow your answer choices to 2-3 contenders and then use the negation technique on those remaining answer choices.

Hope this helps!
Lawyered
LSAT Apprentice
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 12:27 pm
Points: 25

Yes! Absolutely. Just making sure I had my steps right.

Thank you!
niki
LSAT Apprentice
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 10:04 pm
Points: 16

Hi,

I made this into a conditional relationship where if authority -> orchestra respects artistic interpretations currently pursued.

As such, when I negated answer choice D, it resulted in the contrapositive of the above conditional relationship. Thus, I knew D was the correct answer.

Was this a legitimate way of finding the answer choice?
Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 2489
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:01 pm
Points: 2,304

I think that is legit, niki! The "must" in the stimulus could be treated conditionally, and that would yield the relationship you diagrammed. The negation of D is a little challenging to twist into a conditional framework, in my view, because "before" isn't really conditional, just temporal, but if that got you to where you needed to be, in this case I would say it's okay that you went there. Just be careful about trying to force things into conditional relationships - just because you can doesn't mean you should, and sometimes it's better to just focus on the "gap" in the argument and look for something that connects the disconnected elements.

Good work!
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam
hwkim93
LSAT Apprentice
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2018 10:55 pm
Points: 5

Hello.

I had a quick question regarding diagramming the first sentence of the stimulus.
I diagrammed it as follows:

superior conductor :arrow: authority to insist

But I was wondering if the "mark" had instead been "surest mark" (which I saw in PT 3 Section 4 #9), would it have been correct to have diagrammed it with the sufficient and necessary conditions flipped?

authority to insist :arrow: superior condcutor

My reasoning was that while "mark" simply entails that the authority to insist was a characteristic of a superior conductor that other professions could possibly hold, "surest mark" would imply that the characteristic is most characteristic of a superior conductor and thus be rightfully deemed a sufficient condition.

I hope that made sense.
Brook Miscoski
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 226
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:38 am
Points: 226

kim,

I think that your concern is whether a slight wording difference could complicate the identification of the correct answer choice. I would like to address that before moving on to the question about "surest."

Even if the relationship between the conductor and authority were flipped, the second sentence still establishes the claim that authority depends on obtaining respect for artistic interpretations. Answer Choice D is still required (an assumption) for that claim, and it is still true that none of the other answer choices are good candidates. So, you shouldn't be worried about this issue, if you are.

Getting to the issue of how "surest" might change the scenario...

Currently, the author's claim is absolute--a superior conductor has "THE mark" (emphasis added). So it is fair to propose the conditional statement that you have made.

If you added "surest," the author's claim would be less absolute. I would not say that "the surest mark" is either necessary or sufficient. On December 1991 LR Section IV, #9, the author stated that the "surest mark" of self confidence was self-deprecation, and that self-deprecation was even more revealing than letting others poke fun. That lets you know that self-deprecation and the willingness to hear stories about yourself have a relationship to self confidence, and answer choice A to that question is the only answer choice that has anything to do with the relationship established by the stimulus. It is not a stellar example of conditional reasoning, which is why the question stem asks you what is "MOST supported" (emphasis added).