LSAT－8－4－21

swimmingfrog

21.   Jane: Professor Harper’s ideas for modifying the design of guitars are of no value because there is no general agreement among musicians as to what a guitar should sound like and, consequently, no widely accepted basis for evaluating the merits of a guitar’s sound.

Mark: What’s more, Harper’s ideas have had enough time to be adopted if they really resulted in superior sound. It took only ten years for the Torres design for guitars to be almost universally adopted because of the improvement it makes in tonal quality.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship between Jane’s argument and Mark’s argument?

(A) Mark’s argument shows how a weakness in Jane’s argument can be overcome.

(B) Mark’s argument has a premise in common with Jane’s argument.

(C) Mark and Jane use similar techniques to argue for different conclusions.

(D) Mark’s argument restates Jane’s argument in other terms.（E）

(E) Mark’s argument and Jane’s argument are based on conflicting suppositions

I don't understand Mark's point.

Irena

E is correct.

Mark and Jane have the same conclusion - Professor Harper's idea of making a better guitar has no value. However, they have different suppositions.

Jane's supposition is that  there is NO criteria to judge a "better guitar sound", so Harper's guitar idea does not have value.

Mark's supposition is that a better guitar sound CAN be judged --Torres guitar is already adopted, and judged to have better sound in 10 years.  Harper's guitar idea has no value, because it has been more than 10 years and it is still not adopted.

swimmingfrog

clear,

Thanks Irena!