LSAT Explanation PT 22, S2, Q20: Pieces of music consist of sounds

LSAT Question Stem

The reasoning in the argument is flawed because 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is E. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

The question type for this problem is a Flaw question, which means we are asked to identify a flaw in the argument's reasoning.

Let's first analyze and summarize the argument in the passage. The argument states that pieces of music have a temporal order, while paintings do not because there is no specific path that the viewer's eye must follow. Based on this premise, the conclusion is that an essential distinction between experiencing music and viewing paintings is that music has a temporal dimension, but paintings do not.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Does the viewer's eye follow any path when viewing a painting, even if it's not a specific one?"

Now, let's discuss each answer choice:

a) This answer choice suggests that the argument does not consider the possibility of being immersed in a painting without being aware of time passing. However, this is not the main flaw in the argument, as the focus is on the absence of a set path or sequence in the art form, not the viewer's awareness of time.

b) The answer choice argues that the definition of music used in the argument is too general and does not include distinctions among styles. However, the main focus of the argument is on paintings and their lack of a temporal dimension. The flaw in the argument is not related to the example of music.

c) This answer choice seems to imply that the argument fails to consider common aspects of music and paintings as forms of artistic expression. However, even if these common aspects were brought up, they would not address the flaw in the argument, which is related to the temporal dimension of experiencing paintings.

d) This answer choice criticizes the argument for relying on the metaphor of "reading" to describe how a painting is viewed. However, the use of this metaphor does not cause the argument to assume the truth of the conclusion. The argument still focuses on the lack of a set sequence in paintings to conclude that they lack a temporal dimension.

e) This is the correct answer choice. It states that just because there is no specific path that the eye must follow when viewing a painting, it does not mean that the eye follows no path at all. In other words, there may still be a temporal dimension in viewing a painting as the viewer's eye moves along a self-created path.

In conclusion, the flaw in the argument is that it assumes that the absence of a specific path for the viewer's eye means there is no temporal dimension in viewing a painting. However, the viewer's eye may still follow a self-created path, which would introduce a temporal dimension to the experience of viewing a painting.