## PT 43 - Section 3 - #5

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
seaghost527

Posts: 22
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 8:56 pm

### PT 43 - Section 3 - #5

Can anyone help me w/ #5 -- Is one part of the art critic's statement the sufficient condition and one part the necessary? If so, which is which, and how would one determine what is sufficient vs necessary in a statement with no strong indicator words (if, only, whenever, etc).

I really appreciate any help in general with this kind of problem (if it's a formal logic on) when there are no indicator words, thx.

seaghost527

Posts: 22
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 8:56 pm

### Re: PT 43 - Section 3 - #5

bump

Fresh

Posts: 681
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 4:30 pm

### Re: PT 43 - Section 3 - #5

Principle: If it stimulates the audience, then it has aesthetic value
Contrapositive: If it doesn't have aesthetic value, then it doesn't stimulate the audience

Choice E is a paraphrase of the contrapositive

Jeffort

Posts: 1888
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm

### Re: PT 43 - Section 3 - #5

Yeah, there is a conditional statement masked in that.

Saying that the aesthetic value of a piece of art lies it in being ABLE to stimulate a reaction from the audience is a round about way of saying that stimulating such a reaction in the audience is a necessary condition for it to qualify as having aesthetic value.

The credited answer choice is an application of the contrapositive. If the art work is incapable of producing such a reaction it is missing the necessary condition and according to the critic would have little aesthetic value.

roranoa

Posts: 559
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:18 am

### Re: PT 43 - Section 3 - #5

seaghost527 wrote:bump

Don't try to approach this as a formal logic question.
(if/then, necessary/ sufficient)

The critic says that the value of art lies(depends) in its ability to impart something to the audience.

Now, all you have to do is keep that in mind and look at the answer choices.

a) This rejects a painting value just because it's a copy of something else. It doesn't talk about whether the painting imparts something to the audience. So ding.

b) This says that the symphony has value (beautiful) not because it imparts something to the audience, but because it is performed well. Ding.

c) It says the sculpture is beautiful because of its material. Again, no mention about imparting something to its audience.

d) Valuable because of its artist. Ding

e) Deficient because it does not have impact on the audience. This is the only answer that mentions what was said in the stimulus.