Q25 - Art critic: An arrangement of objects

[Laura Damone]

Question Type:
Inference (Generalization/Principle Example)

Stimulus Breakdown:
A generalization isn't necessarily conditional, but it is typically helpful to think of generalizations presented on the LSAT the way we think about general principles. While we may not diagram the generalization, we should understand its component parts. The Art critic in this question tells us that an arrangement of objects tends to be aesthetically pleasing to the extent that it gives the impression that the arranger was successful at achieving his or her aim. That expresses a proportional relationship: the more successful we think the arranger was, the more pleasing we find the arrangement.

Answer Anticipation:
Our correct answer will likely give us a premise that establishes the impression of success and a conclusion that infers how pleasing it is, or vica versa.

Correct answer:
D

Answer choice analysis:
(A) The generalization can't help us conclude a recommendation to rearrange. Eliminate!

(B) This argument establishes that one arrangement is less pleasing than other arrangements. If this answer were to be correct, the argument would need to conclude that the less pleasing arrangement does not give as strong an impression of the arranger's success as the other arrangements. But that's not what B does. For one thing, B's conclusion is absolute, not relative: the panels are probably not arrnaged the way the artist wanted them. We can't conclude something absolute because the only evidence we have is relative: it's all about one installation as compared to others. Furthermore, the generalization is about the impression of success, not about actual success. We therefore can't use it to conclude anything about an artist's actual success in achieving his or her aims.

(C) The premise of answer choice C is all about symmetry. But no link between symmetry and aesthetic pleasure is established. Eliminate!

(D) The premise and conclusion of answer choice D both deal with symmetry, so we might be skeptical that this is out of scope. However, the argument establishes a link between symmetry and the concepts from our generalization. The premise tells us that a more symmetrical arrangement would give more of an impression that she had been successful at achieving her aims. The conclusion is that symmetry would make the installation more aesthetically pleasing. That's a match for our generalization. Select!

(E) The premise of answer choice E is about giving less of an impression that every aspect of the arrangement was planned. If anything, that would make an arrangement less pleasing by the metric of our generalization, because it would detract from the impression that the artist succeeded in achieving his or her aims. Eliminate!

Takeaway/Pattern:
Generalization questions aren't common, but they are very similar to Principle Example questions, so don't freak out if you see one. Instead, break down the generalization the way you would break down a principle. Know what's the trigger condition and what's the consequence. In this example, either condition could trigger the other; that's the nature of a proportional relationship. As either goes up or down, so goes the other.

#officialexplanation