LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following is an assumption that the art historian's argument requires in order for its conclusion to be properly drawn? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Necessary Assumption question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is D. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the structure of the argument in the passage. The art historian presents two examples of great works of art that elicited outrage when first presented: Stravinsky's Rite of Spring and Manet's Déjeuner sur l'herbe. From these examples, the art historian draws a general premise that art is often shocking. Then, the art historian concludes that we should not hesitate to use public funds to support works of art that many people find shocking. In this argument, the premise is that art is often shocking, and the conclusion is that we should use public funds to support shocking art.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Is it appropriate to use public funds for the purpose of supporting art?"

Now, let's discuss the question type and answer choices. The question type is Necessary Assumption, which means we need to identify an assumption that the argument requires for its conclusion to be properly drawn.

a) Most art is shocking.

This answer choice is incorrect because the argument only requires that art is often shocking, not necessarily most art. The negation of this statement would still allow for the premise that art is often shocking to be true.

b) Stravinsky and Manet received public funding for their art.

This answer choice is also incorrect because it addresses an issue outside the scope of the argument. The argument does not rely on whether Stravinsky and Manet received public funding for their art.

c) Art used to be more shocking than it currently is.

This answer choice is incorrect as it is irrelevant to the argument. The argument's premise is that art is often shocking, not that it was more shocking in the past.

d) Public funds should support art.

This is the correct answer. The conclusion states that we should not hesitate to use public funds to support works of art that many people find shocking. This conclusion assumes that it is appropriate to use public funds to support art in general. If we negate this statement, the conclusion would not be properly drawn.

e) Anything that shocks is art.

This answer choice is incorrect because the argument does not rely on the assumption that anything that shocks is art. The negation of this statement would still allow for the premise that art is often shocking to be true.

In summary, the correct answer is D, as it is an assumption that the art historian's argument requires for its conclusion to be properly drawn.