Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Critics say old-time directors were just filming their own personal fantasies, but they were actually just making movies they knew would sell to audiences who wanted to escape their own poverty.

Conclusion: The criticism that Depression-era filmmakers were self-indulgently reflecting their own dreams is inaccurate.

Reasoning: Filmmakers were motivated by profit and provided audiences with the wealth-related fantasies that the audiences specifically wanted to see.

Analysis: The argument attempts to disprove 'self-indulgence' by pointing to 'profit motive' and 'audience demand.' However, there is a logical gap: couldn't a filmmaker's own desires happen to align with what the audience wants? To make the conclusion follow logically, we need an assumption that bridges this gap. Look for an answer that suggests if a filmmaker is motivated by profit or audience preference, they cannot be considered 'self-indulgent' in their creative choices.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

9.

The conclusion of the argument follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

Correct Answer
E
E supplies the missing rule: if a filmmaker gives an audience what it most wants, that cannot be self-indulgent. Combined with the premise that these filmmakers did exactly that, the conclusion that the second criticism is inaccurate follows.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep