PT59, S2, Q24 Forum

[MissLucky]

Hi there,

Can someone confirm for me my thoughts on why (E) is wrong and why (B) is correct?
This is what I'm thinking...

(E) is off because it is too extreme in saying "the most intense competition." We know that 59% of consumers intend to use the cards only to avoid carrying cash and writing checks, so it makes sense that they would be interested in a credit card company that is accepted at as many places at possible. However, (E) goes wrong in it's extreme wording - we have no means of knowing that this is a service that customers are MOST interested in - most of them can surely be interested in this service, but we don't know that there aren't other interests that top this one. What do you think?

Meanwhile, (B) is correct because it plays it much safer - we know for a fact that most consumers plan on paying off their balances before getting charged interest, so we can safely infer that most consumers don't desire interest and therefore that having interest pile up is certainly not an aspect of service that customers are most interested in, right?

confirmation + further thoughts are very welcome

thanks and happy studying

[Atlas LSAT Teacher]

My colleague wrote this explanation: The argument's evidence is enough to establish that the eighteenth-century notion of aesthetics was incomplete, but the conclusion is much stronger than this. The conclusion goes so far as saying there can be no complete theory of aesthetics.

The argument simply fails to consider that there might be other notions of aesthetics that might offer a complete theory of aesthetics. Answer choice (E) describes the flaw committed in the argument in that the argument is assuming that since the eighteenth century notion of aesthetics was insufficient that no theory will be sufficient. Answer choice (E) basically says that the eighteenth century notion of aesthetics is as complete as any theory could be - that no theory could be more complete.

(A) is irrelevant as the argument does not suggest nor rely on the notion that one form of art is more important than another.
(B) is unsupported. The argument never assumes what was the guiding force for the rebellious artists mentioned in the stimulus.
(C) is irrelevant. The distinction drawn in the answer choice relating theories drawn in one part of the world and theories drawn in other parts of the world.
(D) is too strong. The argument states that the rebellious art is not addressed by the eighteenth-century notion of aesthetics, but the argument never goes so far as assuming that it's the only art not addressed by that notion.

I hope that helps, but happy to dig in further to the question if it doesn't.

[MissLucky]

thank you but this response is to S3's #24, not to S2's. Regardless, (B) on this one (the S3 one whose explanation you posted) is giving me difficulty - would it be better if it said "overlooks the possibility that artists' rebellion in the 1960s against earlier notions of art was guided by their knowledge of 18th century European aesthetic theory." Because if it was so guided, then perhaps it fits into the 18th century theory aesthetic theory, despite rebelling against earlier notions of art (there can be contradictions across time periods within one theory).

Thanks!

[Atlas LSAT Teacher]

Well, that was stupid of me. You can find an explanation of the real 24 here: http://www.atlaslsat.com/forums/preptes ... -f139.html

As to your question - interesting. Getting into the "what ifs" is always fun and dangerous!

I think your re-worked (B) still would not be a flaw, because it seems to me that even if the 60's art was guided by knowledge of the 18th century aesthetic theory, according to the stimulus, it still falls outside the bounds of the aesthetic theory. Even without that contradiction, being informed by something doesn't mean you necessarily fit into it.

What do you think?