it came down to c and e. i went with c because i thought e had a degree issue with the word "mistaken. i guess i thought that was too definitive of a statement. both answers are essentially saying the same thing. very tough to distinguish. does anyone have any constructive feedback?
jordan
LSAT Forum
6 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- jrdn_pearl
-
Thanks Received: 0
-
Vinny Gambini
- Posts: 15
- Joined: August 21st, 2009
- First Responder
-
- noah
-
Thanks Received: 1192
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 1541
- Joined: February 11th, 2009
Re: PT 49 S3 Q10 - Through the last half century, the techniques
Hi Jordan, (C) is a tempting answer, however, along with another problem, it is actually missing the "mistaken" that (E) has.
The first paragraph of the passages quotes someone saying that the classification system under discussion is a "dreadful oversimplification," and then the rest of the passage goes on to explain why. If the passage were simply, as (C) suggests, an attempt to explain the principles, then you would not have all this critical discussion.
Furthermore, (C) focuses on the "principles" used by a group of historians. If we were to re-write this passage to be about that, we would want to discuss things such as "these historians used the principle of geographical proximity when developing a classification system for African art..." Instead, the author of this passage explains why the system those historians created are problematic.
As for the other answers:
(A) is unsupported/narrow--while the passage discusses artistic styles, the passage uses those to discuss issues with the way these objects and styles have been classified.
(B) is too narrow. While the passage may point out examples of this, it's used to make a broader point.
(D) it tempting, but while there may be some revealing of underlying assumptions (see lines 4-6), the point is to critique the classification.
(E) is correct--the author points out that limiting an art style to objects made in a certain region is too simplistic.
The first paragraph of the passages quotes someone saying that the classification system under discussion is a "dreadful oversimplification," and then the rest of the passage goes on to explain why. If the passage were simply, as (C) suggests, an attempt to explain the principles, then you would not have all this critical discussion.
Furthermore, (C) focuses on the "principles" used by a group of historians. If we were to re-write this passage to be about that, we would want to discuss things such as "these historians used the principle of geographical proximity when developing a classification system for African art..." Instead, the author of this passage explains why the system those historians created are problematic.
As for the other answers:
(A) is unsupported/narrow--while the passage discusses artistic styles, the passage uses those to discuss issues with the way these objects and styles have been classified.
(B) is too narrow. While the passage may point out examples of this, it's used to make a broader point.
(D) it tempting, but while there may be some revealing of underlying assumptions (see lines 4-6), the point is to critique the classification.
(E) is correct--the author points out that limiting an art style to objects made in a certain region is too simplistic.
-
- alana.canfield
-
Thanks Received: 4
- Forum Guests
- Posts: 33
- Joined: March 28th, 2011
- Location: Richmond, California
Re: Q10
I debated between D & E. Chose (D) because I believed the author was pointing out that the traditional form of classification was assuming that 1 style of art is limited to 1 area populated by 1 tribe. The whole passage is about showing that this assumption is wrong. I did not choose (E) because, although it was tempting, the author never actively says the current system is mistaken, only that it is an oversimplification. Lots of things are overly simplified but still correct. Can anyone shed any light on this passage on why (E) beats out (D)?
-
- noah
-
Thanks Received: 1192
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 1541
- Joined: February 11th, 2009
- This post thanked 1 time.
Re: Q10
alana.canfield Wrote:I debated between D & E. Chose (D) because I believed the author was pointing out that the traditional form of classification was assuming that 1 style of art is limited to 1 area populated by 1 tribe. The whole passage is about showing that this assumption is wrong. I did not choose (E) because, although it was tempting, the author never actively says the current system is mistaken, only that it is an oversimplification. Lots of things are overly simplified but still correct. Can anyone shed any light on this passage on why (E) beats out (D)?
I added more discussion of (D) above. Take a look--I hope that clears it up.
I'd say that oversimplification indicates a mistake. It's overdoing it!
Plus, lines 55-end are clearly pointing out a mistake.
-
- olaizola.mariana
-
Thanks Received: 2
-
Elle Woods
- Posts: 52
- Joined: May 12th, 2015
Re: Q10
Noah, where is your additional discussion of (D)? I don't see it here...
I thought (E) used language that was way too strong, especially considering the two "perhaps" in the final paragraph. The author seems to be asking that historians re-examine their assumptions, rather than dismissing their approach outright. Also, in para. 1, the author quotes a critic saying that the prevailing idea...MAY be "a dreadful oversimplification." Neither the author nor this critic categorically says it is a mistake.
Perhaps I am being too nitpicky and reading too much into these little words. But when I re-read the passage as a whole, it really did seem like an appeal for considering new evidence that challenges historians' assumptions, rather than an all-out attack against their existing approach.
Could someone weigh in?
I thought (E) used language that was way too strong, especially considering the two "perhaps" in the final paragraph. The author seems to be asking that historians re-examine their assumptions, rather than dismissing their approach outright. Also, in para. 1, the author quotes a critic saying that the prevailing idea...MAY be "a dreadful oversimplification." Neither the author nor this critic categorically says it is a mistake.
Perhaps I am being too nitpicky and reading too much into these little words. But when I re-read the passage as a whole, it really did seem like an appeal for considering new evidence that challenges historians' assumptions, rather than an all-out attack against their existing approach.
Could someone weigh in?
-
- maryadkins
-
Thanks Received: 641
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 1261
- Joined: March 23rd, 2011
Re: Q10
Well, I'm with you, this is hard, and I probably would have chosen (D) in real time, too.
But on deeper review, it's not strong enough. Look at the last sentence of the passage: "one cannot readily tell...by analyzing...characteristics." The author is not just "revealing" certain assumptions of the method. The author is making an actual argument AGAINST this classification system. (E) is a better match for this reason.
And to your point, the various "perhaps" sentences aren't fudging on whether he doesn't like the classification system; they are making suggestions for alternative approaches.
But on deeper review, it's not strong enough. Look at the last sentence of the passage: "one cannot readily tell...by analyzing...characteristics." The author is not just "revealing" certain assumptions of the method. The author is making an actual argument AGAINST this classification system. (E) is a better match for this reason.
And to your point, the various "perhaps" sentences aren't fudging on whether he doesn't like the classification system; they are making suggestions for alternative approaches.
6 posts Page 1 of 1