• Nathan Fox

The "Something-Else" Role

Test 59 - Section 2 - Question 7

Logical Reasoning

Difficulty: 5


Explanation


On questions that ask me to describe the role played in an argument, I always start with well, is it the conclusion? Or a premise in support of that conclusion? Or is it something else? 


Here, it's "something else." 


The conclusion is "there must be some other reason besides seeing the performers why live music is better than tape." 


The premise in support of this conclusion is "there is relatively little difference between listening to someone read a story over the radio and listening to someone in the same room read a story." 


So like, "attending a live musical performance is a richer experience than is listening to recorded music" is the thing that we're talking about explaining, right? It's not the conclusion; the conclusion is basically "idk, there must be some other reason." The premise is the whole radio analogy. So "attending a live musical performance is a richer experience than is listening to recorded music" is the thing that the conclusion says is not, yet, explained—the argument shits on one explanation, but fails to itself offer a competing explanation. 


A) Nope. This answer describes the argument's conclusion. "Attending a live musical performance is a richer experience than is listening to recorded music" is not the argument's conclusion.


B) Lots of words here. And nope. "Attending a live musical performance is a richer experience than is listening to recorded music" is what we're talking about—this is the thing we are attempting to explain, even though the columnist doesn't give an actual explanation. 


C) Nope, the argument doesn't actually offer an explanation.


D) No, the argument does not disagree with "attending a live musical performance is a richer experience than is listening to recorded music."

E) Jaysus, finally. The "position the columnist tries to undermine" is "we can see the performers." "We can see the performers" is purported to explain "attending a live musical performance is a richer experience than is listening to recorded music." So, "attending a live musical performance is a richer experience than is listening to recorded music" is "what the position that the columnist tries to undermine is purported to explain."

Get more of these explanations from the LSAT Demon

36 views

Recent Posts

See All

The Critical "Must Be True"

Test 53 - Section 1 - Question 5 Logical Reasoning Difficulty: 1 Explanation Make sure you master this one before you move on. It's a great teaching example of the critical Must Be True (or "Supported

Infinite Ways to Lose

Test 36 - Section 3 - Question 22 Logical Reasoning Difficulty: 4 Explanation There are a million ways this argument could go wrong. Sure, the process of decaffeination might not cost anything. But hi

Pertinent Evidence

Test 58 - Section 4 - Question 23 Logical Reasoning Difficulty: 5 Explanation Demon user Will C proclaims, "I chose A over E because I overlooked the word 'Meteor' in answer B. Damnit. So—B is correct

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn Social Icon
  • YouTube
  • iTunes Social Icon

Thinking LSAT © 2020