#18 - Liang: Watching movies in which violence is portrayed

[Administrator]

Please post below with any questions!

[rhea.george]

I chose B on this question. I understand why A, C, and E are eliminated. However, I cannot understand why D is the correct answer. Don't Liang and Sarah essentially agree that mature audiences are unlikely to believe that violence is an appropriate way to resolve problems (Answer choice B) because of Liang's statement that only children's access should be restricted and then Sarah's statement that mature audiences will "thus be purged" of emotions associated with aggression.

I don't understand what in the the stimulus indicates that the effects of dramatic depictions of violence are "at least partially understood." (Answer choice D)

Thank you!

[Emily Haney-Caron]

Hi rhea.george,

Good question! I think your confusion here comes from thinking that Liang said only children's access should be restricted. Actually, though, Liang doesn't say that; Liang leaves out mature audiences all together, and only speaks to children. Liang might also think that mature audiences will see violence as a way to solve problems; that's just not the focus on the statement here. That means B can't be right, because we just don't know one way or the other. D, on the other hand, works much better: both Liang and Sarah assert something about the impact of violent media on audiences. They assert different things, but both put forth a premise about watching violence that indicates something they believe we know about the impact of watching violence on the audience. That means that D has to be true. Does that make sense?

[rhea.george]

Hi Emily,

That makes much more sense now. Thank you

Rhea

[JustKeepStudying]

Hi,

I also chose B and understand why it's wrong. But I'm still struggling to accept D. Could you further elaborate on how Liang's and Sarah's comments show an understanding of the effects of violent movies. Or is the agreed upon effect the "increased levels of aggression"? I eliminated D because "at least partially understood" seemed incredibly vague. Like literally anything can be at least partially understood lol

-Tif

[Francis O'Rourke]

Hi JKS,

Answer choice (D) states that these two speakers agree that we know something about the effects of depictions of violence on audiences. To confirm this, we need to see if both speakers point to an effect of the depictions of violence as a fact.

Liang states that it is true that watching violence sometimes increases levels of aggression in viewers She would thus agree that we know something about the effects of watching depictions of violence.

Sarah claims that watching dramas with violent characters has the effect of allowing viewers to vicariously experience some emotions and thus purge themselves of those emotions.

Liang and Sarah might not agree on any specific effect that violence has on audiences, but we don't need to prove that they do. They would both claim that they understand something about the effects of watching violence on audiences, which is all that answer choice (D) requires.

Let me know if this helps!

[JustKeepStudying]

Yes, this clears it up for me! I see that I need to always make sure the right answer points to something both speakers do in the stimulus. Thank you!

[graceli17]

Hi!

Could you explain why answer choice C is incorrect? Liang argues that watching violent movies increases violence in viewers so access should be limited, while Sarah argues that watching violent dramas causes purging of aggression (i.e. decreases violence in viewers) so access should not be limited. I see it as they both agree that content should be limited when violence increases in viewers, which is what C says.

Thanks!

[Brook Miscoski]

Grace,

You need to focus on the conclusions stated by Liang and Sarah. Liang believes that movies should be restricted; Sarah believes they should not be restricted. Because of that, you should be very wary of answer choice (C), because Sarah has not stated that she believes that movies should be restricted for any reason.

What happened here is that you invented a backstory for Sarah's argument--you are saying that since her reasoning was driven by violence reduction, she would also be in favor of restricting access to violent movies if those movies would increase violence in viewers. That's a plausible conclusion on your part, and it's a useful life skill outside of the LSAT. However, on main point and point at issue questions you need to stick to the premises and conclusions the stimulus explicitly states. In this case, Sarah has stated she would never support restricting access for mature viewers, so you cannot pick (C).

[amirra30]

My trouble with D is that it used the term "dramatic depictions," and I could not reconcile that with Liang. Is dramatic depictions here supposed to mean, "in tv/ moviee dramas" i.e. as a genre, rather than the other meaning, i.e. extreme