Q2

[slimjimsquinn]

I have a bone to pick with answer D). I'm not convinced that the critic thinks those artists were prophetic due to "insights into the European political situation."

Insights implies inside knowledge or special contacts, both real world examples. Prophecy implies something beyond human knowledge....there's more mystery.

I chose E) " little significance to the history of post-World War I" because of the line " i tis the very prophetic power of these artworks, and NOT their break with traditional artistic techniques, that constitutes their chief interest and value."

E) seemed the most provable. Please tell me where I went wrong? The answer boggles me.

[maryadkins]

"Insight" isn't actually just the two things you mention. It can certainly be an abstract, intuitive understanding that isn't just a tip-off by someone or a special source of information. (I won't actually paste a definition here because I know you can look that up.) It works here with prophesy.

Regarding (E), just because their "chief value" is that they're prophetic doesn't mean the critic would think their styles are of little significance to the history of art. We don't know that at all.

Hope that helps!

[daijob]

Is D the answer because both D and 19-20 talk about prophetic power?

Thank you

[maryadkins]

You bet!

All we know about this critic is what he thinks the artworks' "chief interest and value" is their prophetic power. We don't know ANYTHING about what this critic would say about their stylistic techniques, otherwise, or how those techniques related to their prophetic power. So (A), (B), (C) and (E) are all out.

[DavidS899]

I agree with the earlier commenter. To me "shrewd predictions" seems to connote something antithetical to "prophetic power".

The author of the passage in making a concession that artists may speculate about the future also says that "speculation about the possibility of war in Europe was certainly widespread during the early years of the twentieth century." Which although this comes at the end of a concession, seems to nod to the idea that this form of speculation was actually not exceptional and certainly not prophetic because it was widespread and therefore to some degree predictable.

My main problem on the LSAT is reading into their paraphrasing and synonym usage and getting answers wrong because of it. I come from a creative writing/poetry background where we would spend whole class periods trying to decide how connotation can change from something like "prediction" vs "prophetic", so frustrating.