Q12 - Music critic: Some people

[greatwhiteshark100]

I see that B is the right answer by crossing out the unlikely ones, but I don't really see how B figures out. Thanks!

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Ambiguous word usage is a common flaw on the LSAT. It occurs when a key term has shifted it's meaning over the course of the argument. Sometimes it's obvious how the key term has been shifted, others less so. This question is a case of the latter example. Generally, there are a few signals that the test-writer offers us to help identify this particular flaw. So if I find myself on an identify the flaw question and I can't readily see the flaw, but I see ambiguous word usage as an answer choice I'll check for the following two things in the stimulus. Frequently you'll notice a different suffix or prefix on a word. Other times the argument will use the same adjective to describe two different nouns - that's what is happening in this question.

"religious texts" vs. "religious music"

I don't really see this as a different meaning of the word "religious," but I've learned to give the test-writer what he/she wants and this is definitely one clue that the test writer uses.

Does that help clear this one up?

[benjamin.carson.harning]

This is not quite cleared up for me

I chose (C) and now I see how this is not right...

My question for you is how different meanings of the term "religious" are used. The other answers are pretty easy to weed out, but i'd like your opinion of the stimulus and how this is deemed an equivocation flaw...thanks.

That said, I think this question is garbage.
I had not, until now, come across a question in my LSAT prep that remained such a mystery to me after the fact.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

My question for you is how different meanings of the term "religious" are used.

I think I've changed my mind about this one. I've thought for a long time that this one was garbage too. But maybe it's not quite what I thought.

I was focusing on the use of "religious" twice in the stimulus, but that's probably not the Equivocation in this argument. I cannot think of how "religious" as it describes texts is any different than the term "religious" as it describes music.

It must be that the equivocation is between the word "religious" and "divinely." Flaws describe the error in reasoning between the evidence and the conclusion - not between the premises themselves. The argument is flawed because the conclusion assumes that establishing this work to be "religious" proves that it is "divine."

What do you think?

[benjamin.carson.harning]

I must agree with your new understanding (and thankfully this problem is cleared up for me now).

The equivocation flaw is clear once we see "divinely inspired" used as justification for his symphonies being deemed "religious music" and, actually, this follows in line with what I first pre-phrased as an answer...something along the lines of: just because he sat in a Parisian cathedral and listened to the Vierne's work that, in and of itself, does not justify his symphonies being "religious music".

This question will make me more aware of the fact that some equivocation flaws occur on the LSAT confounding two words with "similar enough" meanings, opposed to the same word being misinterpreted or used in two incoherent ways.

The equivocation, as we've seen, needs to be dug up a bit more than, say, in problem #18 in the fourth section of this same PT...but it is indeed there and I appreciate you re-hashing out this question.

[zhanga]

I still can't see how answer B is a perfect fit. I understand that he confuses the idea of divinely inspired to mean religious, but the answer choice says confuses the two different meanings to the term 'religious', since divinely inspired doesn't use the term religious, isn't it kind of a stretch for answer B to be the correct answer?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

but the answer choice says confuses the two different meanings to the term 'religious', since divinely inspired doesn't use the term religious, isn't it kind of a stretch for answer B to be the correct answer?

The typical way in which this flaw occurs is for the same root word is involved in both iterations of the word. For example "mature" vs "maturing."

In this one, in order for the conclusion to be reached that Vierne's works are "divinely inspired" the author confuses being divine with being religious. I know it's not perfect, but I think it's clear that divine was supposed to follow from religious. And clearly that would be confusing the meaning of religious.

Hope that helps, and you might be looking for too perfect of answer. Do you see any answer that makes better sense than answer choice (B)?

[wguwguwgu]

I think B does make sense.
In sentence 1, "some people" say that Vierne is not "regligious", in a sense that it is not "set to music religious text"
In the contra from music critic, he states :quite contrary", which means he thinks Vierne's music IS religious.
As argument, he said that Vierne's pieces are "divinely inspired".
So the unsaid logic behind presumes that "divinely inspired" is "religious".
In doing so, he switched to another meaning of religious that ws not used by "some people" in the first sentence.

[MayMay]

Hey Matt-

In this one, in order for the conclusion to be reached that Vierne's works are "divinely inspired" the author confuses being divine with being religious. I know it's not perfect, but I think it's clear that divine was supposed to follow from religious. And clearly that would be confusing the meaning of religious.

isn't the conclusion that Louis Vienne's music may be religious and the premise that his works was divinely inspired, and not the other way around?

[sikwong09]

It seems like in the first sentence, the music critic uses the word "religious" to mean refer to music that's associated with religious texts, whereas in the second sentence he uses "religious" to refer to music that's divinely inspired. Thus two different meanings.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Great discussion guys! And wow you are really keeping me on my toes, love it!

MayMay you're absolutely right. The conclusion is that the organ symphonies of Louis Vieme are religious music. The evidence for this is that Vierne's works are divinely inspired.

To recap, we're asked to identify a valid criticism of the music critic's reasoning. Answer choice (B) correctly identifies the difference between the two meanings of "religious" identified by sikwong09--nice work!

Incorrect Answers
(A) is out of scope. The only issue involving inspiration is in the evidence and it is an issue of the inspiration for Vierne's works, not whether those works are inspiring.
(C) may be true, but does not matter. The argument did not assume that all organ music is divinely inspired.
(D) is untrue. Symphonies only refers to organ symphonies throughout the argument.
(E) is untrue. The music critic only addresses the organ symphonies composed by Louis Vierne.

[yiwoo0216]

I'm not sure if this is relevant but i'm having some difficulty pinpointing the actual claim being made. The previous postings are describing 2 different focal points and I'm having trouble deciding which one is actually the intended point.

I have 2 scenarios below


SCENARIO 1:
i) Religious text refers to, say, words pertaining to God/bible
vs
ii)Religious music is referring to music with a religious sound (no words)

Whereby, the assumption is that he is equating one description (actual text - inherently religious) and the other description (sound - which by itself is not inherently religious)


SCENARIO 2
i) Religious organ music by Vierne (Due to a religious inspiration)
vs
ii) Religious place being the cathedral

The music is religious because it may be devinely inspired
But
We cannot say that the Cathedral is religious because it is divinely inspired

The assumption is that:

Since his music is played in a religious place, it is religious music


Any input would be helpful. Please and thank you.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Hi yiwoo0216,

I'm not sure that either of your two scenarios quite nails it, though maybe I've misunderstood one of them.

The argument tries to conclude that the organ symphonies of Louis Vierne are religious music. Why? Because they are divinely inspired.

The issue is that "religious" is being used both in an institutional sense as well a spiritual sense of the word.

Hope that helps!

[aaronwfrank]

The argument tries to conclude that the organ symphonies of Louis Vierne are religious music. Why? Because they are divinely inspired.

Hey Matt. I think I understand why B is right but I'm still not quite clear on why A is wrong. I feel like the argument is saying that because Vierne's music is divinely inspired, it is therefore religious music. Is this not a flaw that equates two things as being the same since they share a similar characteristic?

Or is the flaw actually that he assumes "divinely inspired" and religious are the same?