medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Art Critic: Many scholars argue that the paintings of the 'Blue Period' represent the height of this artist's creative achievement. However, these paintings rely on a limited emotional palette and lack the technical complexity found in the artist's later cubist works. Therefore, the cubist period is actually a more significant contribution to modern art.
The statement that the Blue Period paintings rely on a limited emotional palette plays which one of the following roles in the argument?
- It is a premise advanced to weaken the favorable assessment of the Blue Period stated at the outset.
- It is an intermediate conclusion that is itself supported by the later claim about technical complexity.
- It is a claim the critic undertakes to defend by supplying further evidence in its favor later on.
- It is a concession the critic makes to the many admirers of the artist's earlier Blue Period work.
- It is the argument's main conclusion about the relative significance of the two distinct periods.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ