13. (B)
Question type: Assumption
The conclusion of this argument is that the reason modern sculpture is monochromatic is because we mistakenly thought that ancient sculptures were as well. The author is assuming that beliefs about ancient sculptures affect modern sculpture styles, as (B) explains. If (B) is negated, the argument does not make sense since it would be difficult to explain why modern sculpture is affected by the color decay of ancient sculpture if the former is not affected by the latter.
(A) is out of scope. There is no discussion of the natural beauty of the materials.
(C) is unsupported. The comparative decay of the color of the coloring of modern sculpture vis-Ã -vis ancient sculpture is irrelevant to how the two styles relate to each other. If (C) were not true, the argument would still make sense.
(D) is out of scope because it focuses on paintings.
(E) is out of scope because the argument does not offer predictions.
LSAT Forum
4 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- noah
-
Thanks Received: 1192
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 1541
- Joined: February 11th, 2009
-
- jm.kahn
-
Thanks Received: 10
-
Elle Woods
- Posts: 88
- Joined: September 02nd, 2013
Re: Q13 - It is due to a misunderstanding
Isn't there an singular/plural error in choice-B?
Modern sculpture has been influenced by a belief (that ancient sculptures were uncolored) and not beliefs about the ancient sculpture. Can anyone clarify why beliefs instead of belief?
Modern sculpture has been influenced by a belief (that ancient sculptures were uncolored) and not beliefs about the ancient sculpture. Can anyone clarify why beliefs instead of belief?
-
- LolaC289
-
Thanks Received: 21
-
Elle Woods
- Posts: 92
- Joined: January 03rd, 2018
- This post thanked 1 time.
Re: Q13 - It is due to a misunderstanding
For all the people who may still be confused...
The first sentence means most modern sculpture IS monochromatic. But the monochromacy is due to a misunderstanding (of ancient sculpture).
It doesn't mean modern sculpture ISN'T monochromatic. (Confused with "It is misunderstanding/ It is DUE TO misunderstanding that most modern sculpture is monochromatic")
The first sentence means most modern sculpture IS monochromatic. But the monochromacy is due to a misunderstanding (of ancient sculpture).
It doesn't mean modern sculpture ISN'T monochromatic. (Confused with "It is misunderstanding/ It is DUE TO misunderstanding that most modern sculpture is monochromatic")
-
- JeremyK460
-
Thanks Received: 0
-
Elle Woods
- Posts: 80
- Joined: May 29th, 2020
Re: Q13 - It is due to a misunderstanding
This is my first run through at posting a full review of a question. Let me know where I went wrong! This question was awesome!
Breakdown:
Years ago, ancient sculptures were discovered, and they were uncolored. Everyone figured it was inherently monochromatic, however we now know it wasn’t. Therefore, a misunderstanding is why most modern sculptures are monochromatic.
Analogy:
Years ago, ancient cannabis was discovered, and it was purple. Modern growers figured it was inherently grown to be purple, however we now know it wasn’t. Therefore, a misunderstanding is why modern growers grow mostly purple cannabis.
Premises:
Ancient sculptures were discovered. They were monochromatic.
Everyone figured the ancient sculptures’ monochromacy was its natural color.
Conclusion:
Modern sculptors’ misunderstanding caused them to make mostly monochromatic sculptures.
Analysis:
The notion that ancient sculptures intended to be uncolored had an effect on modern artists choosing their sculptures to be uncolored.
Answer Choices:
(A) The natural beauty of the materials out of which modern sculptures are made plays a part in their effect.
Irrelevant: The ‘natural beauty of a modern sculpture’s materials’ The information presented in the argument isn’t indicative of ‘the materials out of which modern sculptures are made’. What ‘part’ does it play? What is its effect exactly? It feels unsubstantiated!
(B) Modern sculpture has been influenced by beliefs about ancient sculpture.
Keep: This has to be true. The modern sculptors’ (incorrect) beliefs must have a formative influence on the modern sculptor’s actions in order to establish their causal relationship.
(C) Ancient sculptures were more susceptible to moisture damage than are modern sculptures.
Irrelevant: There’s nothing in the argument that indicates the relative susceptibility to water damage of either modern or ancient sculptures. The argument mentions water damage to the ancient sculptures over a long period of time; but that’s no cut and dry indication of its susceptibility.
(D) Some ancient paintings known to early archaeologists depicted sculptures.
Irrelevant: The information doesn’t present any indication of what ancient paintings depicted.
(E) As modern sculptors come to believe that ancient sculpture was painted, they will begin to create polychromatic works.
Temporality: This feels temporally off. The argument doesn’t step into ‘future’ territory.
Random Thought:
Is it me, or does this argument make a correlation to causation error? Here me out…!
There’s a correlation between ‘the general misunderstanding of intended monochromacy’ and ‘modern artists creating monochromatic sculptures’. The author concludes that the general incorrect notion that ancient sculptures intended for monochromacy formatively influenced modern artists to create (more) monochromatic sculptures. The argument is under the impression that correlation proves causation.
Any thoughts?!
Breakdown:
Years ago, ancient sculptures were discovered, and they were uncolored. Everyone figured it was inherently monochromatic, however we now know it wasn’t. Therefore, a misunderstanding is why most modern sculptures are monochromatic.
Analogy:
Years ago, ancient cannabis was discovered, and it was purple. Modern growers figured it was inherently grown to be purple, however we now know it wasn’t. Therefore, a misunderstanding is why modern growers grow mostly purple cannabis.
Premises:
Ancient sculptures were discovered. They were monochromatic.
Everyone figured the ancient sculptures’ monochromacy was its natural color.
Conclusion:
Modern sculptors’ misunderstanding caused them to make mostly monochromatic sculptures.
Analysis:
The notion that ancient sculptures intended to be uncolored had an effect on modern artists choosing their sculptures to be uncolored.
Answer Choices:
(A) The natural beauty of the materials out of which modern sculptures are made plays a part in their effect.
Irrelevant: The ‘natural beauty of a modern sculpture’s materials’ The information presented in the argument isn’t indicative of ‘the materials out of which modern sculptures are made’. What ‘part’ does it play? What is its effect exactly? It feels unsubstantiated!
(B) Modern sculpture has been influenced by beliefs about ancient sculpture.
Keep: This has to be true. The modern sculptors’ (incorrect) beliefs must have a formative influence on the modern sculptor’s actions in order to establish their causal relationship.
(C) Ancient sculptures were more susceptible to moisture damage than are modern sculptures.
Irrelevant: There’s nothing in the argument that indicates the relative susceptibility to water damage of either modern or ancient sculptures. The argument mentions water damage to the ancient sculptures over a long period of time; but that’s no cut and dry indication of its susceptibility.
(D) Some ancient paintings known to early archaeologists depicted sculptures.
Irrelevant: The information doesn’t present any indication of what ancient paintings depicted.
(E) As modern sculptors come to believe that ancient sculpture was painted, they will begin to create polychromatic works.
Temporality: This feels temporally off. The argument doesn’t step into ‘future’ territory.
Random Thought:
Is it me, or does this argument make a correlation to causation error? Here me out…!
There’s a correlation between ‘the general misunderstanding of intended monochromacy’ and ‘modern artists creating monochromatic sculptures’. The author concludes that the general incorrect notion that ancient sculptures intended for monochromacy formatively influenced modern artists to create (more) monochromatic sculptures. The argument is under the impression that correlation proves causation.
Any thoughts?!
4 posts Page 1 of 1