LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 8916
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#35289
Complete Question Explanation

Justify the Conclusion. The correct answer choice is (B)

Some Justify questions, particularly those of low to moderate difficulty, can be approached very
mechanistically. The first step is to identify all of the key elements present in the premises. In this
stimulus, the premises focus on photographs, expressions of worldviews, and reality. Next, compare
these elements to those found in the conclusion and identify any differences. The conclusion
addresses photographs and interpretations of reality. Expressions of worldviews is absent from the
conclusion and interpretations of reality has been introduced. The last step is to justify the argument
by linking disparate elements. Since photographs are described as expressions of worldviews in
a premise and then as interpretations of reality in the conclusion, the proper link will allow us to
properly draw this conclusion.

Answer choice (A): Answer choice (A) contains some appealing elements, such as “realistically”
and “interpreting”, but the link is not strong enough for our conclusion. Even if representing a
subject realistically can involve interpreting that subject, does this prove that all photographs are
interpretations of reality? No.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. The stimulus informs us that photographers
unavoidably express their own worldviews in their photographs and this answer indicates that such
expressions are interpretations. Therefore, photographs must be interpretations of reality. This
answer combined with the existing premises will yield the proper conclusion.

Answer choice (C): If (C) is true, then not only is photography an expression of a worldview, but so
are painting, graphic design, sculpture, etc. However, our conclusion only deals with photographs
and adding a premise about other types of visual art does not to confirm the author’s conclusion.

Answer choice (D): This answer is very attractive, as it contains both of the disparate elements
from our analysis (interpretation of reality and expression of worldview). However, compare this
relationship to the one found in answer choice (B). (B) says, EW :arrow: IR, while (D) says, IR :arrow:
EW. Since we know photographs to be expressions of worldview and we want to prove that they are
interpretations of reality, this answer provides the wrong relationship between these elements.

Answer choice (E): This answer is similar to answer (C) in that it potentially broadens the scope of
the stimulus to include nonrealistic as well as realistic photographs. What it fails to do, however,
is conclusively demonstrate how either nonrealistic or realistic photographs should be considered
interpretations of reality.
 netherlands
  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: Apr 17, 2013
|
#8917
Hi there,

Can you explain how to get the right answer to #13, via diagramming. When you explained how to get the answer B you did so via the method of linking terms in the conclusion and premises.

But you disputed "D" via diagramming.
 BethRibet
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 200
  • Joined: Oct 17, 2012
|
#8949
The critical task in this question is to link a subjective term in one of the premises (in this case "express their own worldviews in their photographs", to a subjective term in the conclusion, in this case: "interpretations of reality". You might certainly diagram this linkage if it's helpful to you to visualize, either by underlining both terms, or in another manner that you prefer. The primary thing to remember is that you want to identify and notice two terms which are related, but not identical, such that one must assume they are synonymous in order for the conclusion to be secure.

A very simple example goes like this:
Your shoes are shiny.
Therefore your shoes are cute.

For this conclusion to be assured, the assumption must be: Shiny shoes are cute. Otherwise, there would be no way to get simply from the premise that the shoes shine, to the conclusion in question. Though the test question is more complex in structure and wording, it is using the same basic principle. What information must be true, in order to get from the premise that photographers express their worldviews, to the conclusion that photographers interpret reality? It must be true that expressing one's worldview means one is interpreting reality.
 netherlands
  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: Apr 17, 2013
|
#8992
Hi there,

The wording you used definitely helps me understand this concept a little better.
BethRibet wrote:The primary thing to remember is that you want to identify and notice two terms which are related, but not identical, such that one must assume they are synonymous in order for the conclusion to be secure.
So in the majority of these questions (justify/sufficient assumption) - I'm looking for a connection between premises and the conclusion that have to be assumed in order for the conclusion to be correct?
 Lucas Moreau
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 216
  • Joined: Dec 13, 2012
|
#9000
So in the majority of these questions (justify/sufficient assumption) - I'm looking for a connection between premises and the conclusion that have to be assumed in order for the conclusion to be correct?
I would say so, yes. Assumption questions require you to supply a necessary "link" in the "chain" of logic, or to fill an empty spot in the diagram, if you think of it that way.

If the completed (and sound) argument would go Premise1-Premise2-Conclusion, what's presented in the stimulus might look like Premise1-_______-Conclusion, and the correct answer choice would be Premise2. Of course, it probably won't be presented quite as neatly as that, but it can be reduced to that.

For example, the question in 13:

Photographers express their worldview in their photographs (Premise1) -> To express a worldview is to interpret reality (Premise2) -> Photographs are interpretations of reality (Conclusion)

Premise1 and Conclusion are given in the stimulus, Premise2 is the correct answer choice that is necessary for the argument to be sound.
 hrhyoo
  • Posts: 39
  • Joined: Oct 08, 2019
|
#71881
Sorry but I am still confused after reading all the postings.

Premise 1: Ps express worldviews in their photos.
Premise 2: Those photos - the photos expressing Ps' worldviews - represent reality.
Conclusion: Photos in general are interpretations of reality.

P1 and P2 are linked through the common term of "the photos that express worldviews." And I thought representing and interpreting are different so those two terms need to be linked hencing selecting A as the correct answer choice. What am I doing wrong here?

Please help and thanks in advance!


Hanna
 Jeremy Press
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1000
  • Joined: Jun 12, 2017
|
#71895
Hi Hanna,

You'll want to be a little bit more cautious about applying the "mechanical" method of solving Justify questions that I can see you're trying to implement here. It didn't work for you here, because your sketch of the argument incorrectly describes what you labeled as Premise 2 from the stimulus. The stimulus does not actually say that photos expressing photographers' worldviews do in fact represent reality. Rather, the stimulus says that photographers express their worldviews in their photos, however realistically they represent reality. The "however" means something like "no matter how" realistically they represent reality. In essence, what the author of the argument is doing with that "however" section of the premises is saying that "realism" is not an essential component of (i.e. doesn't matter for) expressing photographers' worldviews. Since the author expressly states that realism is not essential, linking the positive notion of realism to the conclusion will not do anything to prove that the author's premises lead logically to the conclusion. What could prove the conclusion is a link between expression of worldview and interpretation of reality. Answer choices B and D link those terms, and only answer choice B links them in a way that proves with certainty that the conclusion follows from the premise.

I hope this helps!

Jeremy
 hrhyoo
  • Posts: 39
  • Joined: Oct 08, 2019
|
#71898
Arrrrgggg.... why is this question still so hard for me to understand ...

Still, it was helpful that you pointed out the conjunction "however" which does clarify the relationship between two premises in the stimulus. For some reason, I must have skipped over that word as I was reading. I reread the stimulus several times to really grasp the meaning of it and I could kind of see now why worldview and interpretation of reality need to be linked since representing reality is sort of the commom term here. But I am not confident that I would get a question similar to this right the next time yet. :(

Thank you,


Hanna

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.