LSAT Explanation PT 37, S4, Q16: In determining the authenticity of a

LSAT Question Stem

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Flaw question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is C. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

First, let's analyze the argument in the passage. The argument can be summarized as follows:

Premise: Connoisseurs claim to determine a painting's authenticity based on the emotional impact it has on them.

Premise: The degree to which an artwork has an emotional impact differs wildly from person to person.

Conclusion: A connoisseur's assessment cannot be given credence.

The question type for this problem is a Flaw question. We are asked to identify the flaw in the reasoning of the argument.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument would be, "Do connoisseurs have a consistent emotional response among themselves when assessing a painting's authenticity?"

Now let's discuss the answer choices:

a) This answer choice is incorrect because the fact that anybody can give an assessment of the emotional impact of a painting is not a flaw in the argument. The focus of the argument is on the connoisseur's assessment, not on the general public's assessment.

b) Answer choice B is also incorrect. The argument uses Rembrandt as an example to illustrate the idea of using emotional impact to guide the authenticity of a painting. The conclusion is not about paintings in general, but about the credence we can give to connoisseurs' assessments. Using Rembrandt's works as an example does not create a flaw in the argument.

c) This is the correct answer. The argument assumes that because emotional impact varies wildly among people in general, it must also vary wildly among connoisseurs. However, it neglects the possibility that connoisseurs may have a more consistent emotional response among themselves when assessing a painting's authenticity. If connoisseurs generally agree on the emotional impact of a painting, their assessments could be given credence.

d) This answer choice is incorrect because the argument does not presume that a painting's emotional impact is irrelevant to determining its authenticity. Instead, the argument questions the reliability of using emotional impact as a criterion for authenticity due to the wide variation in emotional responses among people.

e) This answer choice is incorrect because the argument does not presume that Rembrandt was better at conveying emotions in painting than other painters. The example of Rembrandt is used to illustrate the connoisseur's method of assessing authenticity, not to compare Rembrandt's skills to those of other painters.

In conclusion, the correct answer is C, as it points out the flaw in the argument that neglects the possibility of widespread agreement among connoisseurs about emotional impact, even when the public's assessment varies wildly.