Q21 - Kostman's original painting of Rosati

[scheung82]

Hi- Can you explain why choice A is the best answer choice? The argument states that if the original painting is not accurate, then any reproductions of that painting will not be accurate. Choice A says the speech is filled with "half truths and misquotes", but concludes with sound quality??

Thanks,
Sandra

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

This is a Match the Flaw question. We need to be comfortable describing what the flaw is first, before we try and find an answer choice that mimics the flaw. The flaw committed in the argument is that the argument assumes that because something is filled with mistakes that a replica will also be filled with mistakes.

In fact, the replica could be a perfect copy of the flawed original. So, we would like an answer that assumes that just because something is full of errors (a flawed original), that a copy of it will also be flawed.

(A) mimics the flaw. The speech was filled with half-truths and misquotes (flaws), but the recording could have been perfectly fine. So, this answer choice makes the same sort of assumption that because something is a flawed original, that a copy of it will also be flawed.
(B) is not even an argument. It's just a conditional relationship.
(C) is not even an argument. It's just a conditional relationship.
(D) has the conclusion right, but the evidence doesn't match. Jo and Layne being different is not the same as having a flawed original.
(E) contains a different flaw. We do not know in which way Harold's second novel is similar to his first. Maybe it is similar to his first in the fact that it's enthralling. In which case, we would actually be faced with a valid argument!

[ebrickm2]

Is it because that accuracy is a broad enough category that we allow for the variance in language in answer choice "A"?

Otherwise, I take issue with A.

I suppose in the stimulus the accuracy could be flaws in lots of different ways which would allow us to assume that the answer choice could also flawed in different ways maintaining parallel flaws.

What chu' thannnk, mods?

[hoffman36]

Just wanted to say thank you for this explanation. I finally understand this problem now!

[lacalidosa11]

Hi sorry I am still confused on this one, cant we say the same for A, if the tape isnt of good sound quality then it would be a valid argument as well. Just as in E, just because it can be enthralling (E) or of bad quality (a) doesnt mean it has to, which both arguments assume equally.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Hi sorry I am still confused on this one, cant we say the same for A, if the tape isnt of good sound quality then it would be a valid argument as well.

I don't think so. Why would the speech being filled with half-truths and lies support the claim that the sound on the copy would be of poor quality?

Just as in E, just because it can be enthralling (E) or of bad quality (a) doesnt mean it has to, which both arguments assume equally.

The error in the reasoning is not asserting something must be true just because it could be true. Instead the error is that a copy of a flawed original, still may nevertheless be an accurate copy.

This error is only evident in answer choice (A). Does that answer your question?

[soyeonjeon]

Why would B not be an answer? I debated between A and B. I think they are both about the replica of the flawed original being necessarily flawed. I see B's argument as "An artist who ~must necessarily paint an ugly picture."

Could you also elaborate on how I can get a similar question correct next time around?

Thank you!!

[deedubbew]

The only way I can see A as the correct answer choice is if the second sentence is replaced with "So the tape recording made of it must be filled with half-truths and misquotes." The flaw is see is that the problem with the first object does not necessarily carry over to the second object. But A inserts a second error instead of dealing with just one like the stimulus. If anything E seems closer to the correct answer, except that the first sentence makes it different from the stimulus.

[Mab6q]

Remember guys, we have to work wrong to right. Focus less on why A is perfect, and more on why the other choices are terrible matches.

[tommywallach]

Good advice, Mab!

[George.kobakhidze61]

Hmm, I thought that the Flaw in the argument was due to misleading use of the key term ("Not Very Accurate Portrait"). So just because the original portrait was not accurate depiction, it does not mean that replication of the portrait itself will not be accurate depiction, as well. Answer A does not have such Flaw, so it really threw me off. I selected B for that reason.

B States: Because painting is a depiction of ugly scene, painting itself must be ugly (if accurately depicted). But here one could argue that its also misleading use of the key term, since there could be aesthetically pleasing painting, depicting ugly scene (Ugly Scene /= Ugly Painting).

Can anybody explain to me why this logic is wrong?

[contropositive]

Is the flaw in the argument part-to-whole kind of flaw? just because original painting had a flaw doesn't mean the replica will have a flaw...that sounds like part-to-whole to me. and Yes 100% agree with the above post, work from wrong to right. If you can't find reasons to eliminate an answer just keep it in your bucket list until you have comfortably eliminated all the ones that are wrong

[greenapples]

Is the flaw in the argument part-to-whole kind of flaw? just because original painting had a flaw doesn't mean the replica will have a flaw...that sounds like part-to-whole to me. and Yes 100% agree with the above post, work from wrong to right. If you can't find reasons to eliminate an answer just keep it in your bucket list until you have comfortably eliminated all the ones that are wrong

I think that's tempting but not necessarily correct. There's nothing part-to-whole about making flawed reasoning for original and a replica of the original.

How I diagrammed the mistake:

K painting of subject -> not accurate PORTRAIT.
Replica of K's painting of subject -> not accurate reproduction of the PAINTING.

Just because a painting of a subject is not accurate depiction of that subject, doesn't mean that the replica will be not an accurate reproduction of the painting that it's replicating. For example, Van Gogh's painting of a subject is not accurate because it's not actually that yellow (this was one of old LSAT questions I think). This doesn't guarantee us to say that a replica of Van Gogh's painting is not an accurate reproduction of Van Gogh's painting. It might be accurate!

I was first hesitant to pick (A) because it parallels "half-truths and misquotes" and "good sound quality" but the logic is the same. A replica of the George's speech (tape recording) can totally have a good sound quality despite George telling half-truths and misquotes.

I am still having trouble ruling out (E) though. Is "Harold's second novel is smiliar to the first" what makes (E) wrong because it's not the same thing as a reproduction?

Thanks in advance!

[tommywallach]

Yeah, a replica isn't part of an original.

[touch_horizon]

I don`t think B is wrong because it is not an argument. of course it can be interpreted as argument. In my opinion, the real reason is that there is no "replica" in B. In the stimulus, the relation is about three elements------ the object, the origin and the replica. however, there is only two in B.