Passage Summary: Lopez says closing the classics department proves the school doesn't care about liberal arts; Warrington argues that since you can study classics in other departments, the specific department isn't necessary.

Conclusion: A university can maintain its commitment to the liberal arts without maintaining a dedicated classics department.

Reasoning: While the study of classical antiquity is essential to the liberal arts, a specific department is not required because other departments can and do facilitate that study.

Analysis: Warrington's argument is a surgical strike against Lopez's assumption that a specific administrative structure is the only way to achieve an educational goal. He identifies a 'part-to-whole' or 'means-to-an-end' confusion in Lopez's logic. By conceding that the *subject* is essential but denying that the *department* is, Warrington effectively distinguishes between the content of the study and the vehicle used to deliver it. When looking for the correct description of this method, focus on how Warrington identifies a distinction that Lopez overlooked.