June 2007, Logical Reasoning 1, Question 25
Next Lesson
PrepTest 123 (June 2007), LR1
Summary
The content provides an in-depth analysis of how to approach paradox questions on the LSAT, specifically focusing on a discrepancy in innovation levels between 19th-century French painting and sculpture.
- Paradox questions require identifying and explaining a discrepancy or a situation that doesn't seem logical.
- The discrepancy in question involves the difference in innovation between French painting and sculpture in the 19th century, despite both being funded by the French Academy of Art.
- The French Academy of Art discouraged innovation, yet painting saw remarkable innovation compared to sculpture.
- The correct answer explains the paradox by highlighting that painters, unlike sculptors, could innovate due to lower costs and less reliance on academy funding.
- Analyzing incorrect answers further clarifies why they fail to resolve the paradox, reinforcing the importance of understanding the underlying situation.
Chapters
00:00
Understanding Paradox Questions
00:35
Analyzing the Paradox
02:15
Resolving the Paradox