#4 - Must Be True, Author’s Perspective

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=10821)

The correct answer choice is (C)

This choice provides little detail, so the answer can be difficult to prephrase, but the correct answer choice will pass the Fact Test, and be verified by the information provided by the author in the passage.

Answer choice (A): The author does not specify what type of publisher might be proper for the work under discussion, so this choice fails the fact test and should be ruled out of contention.

Answer choice (B): The first part of this choice is consistent with the passage, as the author does believe the research-based information in the book to be valuable to scholars (and shed light on previously understudied material), but the second part of this choice fails the Fact Test: the author does not claim to have implemented innovative research methods.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. The author is clearly impressed by Tucker’s many talents, and specifies in the first paragraph that the study should shed new light on an area that previously has been insufficiently studied.

Answer choice (D): The author makes a point of verifying as much of the firsthand testimony from the subject as possible; this is something of an Opposite Answer, since the author does wish to provide an accurate historical record of an important part of African American entertainment history.

Answer choice (E): The author discusses the methodology used to research and verify, but does not claim to provide a methodological guide for authentication. Since this choice fails the Fact Test, it should be ruled out of contention.

[Barcelona10]

Hi,

For question 4, a Must Be True question, I chose answer D thinking that it was supported by the fact that it was supported by both the 3rd and 4th paragraphs. These paragraphs state that an entirely objective account of someone's life, a biography essentially, is nearly impossible because of vested interests and memory problems. So, would the author not agree with D, that his text is not mainly an attempt to report an objectively accurate historical record? The "objectively" lured me in.

The answer is C though, which I can see supported by the second to last sentence. But why is D wrong?

Help would be much appreciated!

[Steve Stein]

Although the author does mention the challenges that present themselves when dealing with firsthand accounts, the author also provides that such testimony must be taken with caution, and that the biographer's duty is to verify as much as possible. Considering this, and the fact that other sources were used as well, it is not clear that the author would agree with this assertion of objective historical inaccuracy.

I hope that's helpful! Please let me know--thanks!

~Steve

[Khodi7531]

This question is not a priority to me, but I am also confused on why the answer isn't D.

Although C was supported, I believed D to be supported more because I thought part of the main point of this passage was that this access to personal belongings and biography of Tucker led to greater US entertainment discoveries.


I got a few other questions wrong, but I believe it was due to the fact that I thought the passages main point was that these discoveries, through researching for a biography, led to greater historical facts that may or may not have been understood. With that MP in mind, I chose D.


How could I have prevented this? Also, because for #5 I chose C, because I thought it approached the MP more holistically. This mistake seems like it carried over into other answer choices and was wondering where I could have better found the main point that doesn't involve "more contributions to US entertainment history".

[James Finch]

Hi Khodi,

This passage is a bit different from most other, in that the the test makers are testing whether test takers understand the context of the passage as an introduction to an academic biography, and thus understand the purpose behind the passage. The passage author gives a number of clues that, when put together, give a clear idea of the main point of the passage. Here, the final sentences in both the first and last paragraphs give us the reason that this passage, an introduction to a book, is being written: it explains why the career biography of Lorenzo Tucker is important and worthy of study, essentially justifying the existence of the book. Lorenzo Tucker's career biography is important because, according to this author, it sheds light on a previously understudied part of US entertainment history.

Introductory and conclusory paragraphs are often where the main point can be found, usually by synthesizing the two. It sounds like you might have only taken the main point from the introduction, and not the conclusion as well. The author wants us to understand that studying Tucker's career teaches us new things about the broader US entertainment industry, and isn't being done just because the man himself is interesting.

Looking through that lens, answer choices (C) and (D) become clearer: (C) basically restates the main point, saying that Tucker is worthy of study not just on his own merits but more so for what his biography reveals about the industry he worked in. (D), in contrast, states that the biography that follows the introduction we have been given as a passage will not accurately report the events of Tucker's career. So (D) serves as an opposite answer, not just unsupported but in opposition to the information given.

As for Question 5, the differences between answer choices (C) and (E)(the correct choice) are more than just semantic. This passage is an introduction to a book, which by its nature will be trying to validate or "sell" the book to its readers, as opposed to "assess the value" of it. (C) describes something closer to a book review: a summary of a thing, followed by an assessment of the value of the thing summarized. (E) describes an introduction much more closely: an explanation of why the subject is worthy of study, and how the study was carried out.

Hope this helps!

[Jonathan Evans]

Hi, Khodi,

Excellent question. Let me second James's response and perhaps add a couple additional points to address here.

First, let's revisit this question task. Since this is a Must Be True question, we are primarily concerned with whether the responses pass the Fact Test™. Thus, we should take half a step back from the main point or primary purpose of the passage when attempting questions such as these.

Which this in mind, however, you are correct to connect the main point of the passage to this question because here we are concerned with a statement with which the author would agree. In other words, the main point, insofar as it expresses the author's viewpoint, will be a valuable tool on this question.

However, since Must Be True questions are very exacting in the textual evidence required to support the credited answer choice, the main point/author's viewpoint here is more useful as a process of elimination tool than it is as an independent tool to support the credited answer.

This is what I mean: the correct answer must agree with the author's viewpoint, but there needs to be textual evidence to corroborate it as well; any answer that disagrees with the author's viewpoint we may rule out.

Thus, we can eliminate confidently answers (A), (B), and (E). These answers, especially (A) and (E), deviate markedly from the author's viewpoint and main point of the passage.

Second, you note correctly that (C) is supported. Not only is (C) supported but it also agrees with the author's viewpoint. We have a strong contender here (for reference, the support may be found in lines 15-19 and 55-61).

Now let's consider answer choice (D) on its own. The negative "it should not" makes parsing this answer choice slightly more challenging, so let's clarify what the statement in answer choice (D) says:

• Don't think of this work primarily as a historically accurate report of events in Tucker's career.

Yes, you are correct that the author intends to address more than Tucker's career per se, but notice that answer choice (D) does not disagree with this idea!

It is precisely through reporting events in Tucker's career that the author intends to shed light on these greater discoveries. In fact, the author has made it clear that the historicity of his materials and rigor of his methods make his work valuable both insofar as it concerns Tucker's career and the history of the entertainment industry that Tucker witnessed.

Thus perhaps one issue you had was a slight misinterpretation of answer choice (D). Answer choice (D) does not imply a singular focus on Tucker. Thus, as James noted, in fact there is strong evidence that this work should be thought of as a historically accurate report of events in Tucker's career.

I hope this helps!

[Khodi7531]

Thanks for the response guys. And just to touch up on a few things....

I see both your points. But I don't think D is saying the opposite...because it's saying it should not "mainly" be taken as accurate - in other words, trying to again say that the point of this passage (or the rest of the passage after the intro) is not about the book only but about how it also contributed to the discovering of other things in US entertainment. This is the way I was reading it...and coupled with the fact that that was the main point of the passage (I thought it was at least) that's why I chose it. And i'm bummed because my RC mistakes are always like this - it's a mistake where after I check I go, "how did I miss that". Which is what i'm feeling after your explanation; that his biography contributing to additional understanding was just something that came out of his biography (but the biography itself IS THE BIGGER PICTURE). That's the way i'm interpreting it now...right?


I honestly was not aware this was considered a MBT question because it's saying MSS. How could it be a MBT when it's asking MSS about what the author would agree....because with that language you can't cross of answers for being just a little off, since MSS answers allow that leeway.



And lastly, just an issue with myself that I constantly suffer from but I tend to get too nit-picky with some answers. Two examples in this passage being in #3. I chose A because it was really close to my anticipated response but still checked everything. I did a slight cross of on it because I didn't like the word "historical facts". The word historical record was found on line 39 and I became a little more comfortable to chose it. Although I know, even if it didn't show up there I don't think it would be that bad of an answer. But in the heat of the moment I tend to cross them off for words that aren't "perfect". And I know you can't ever look for perfect, but just something I suffer from. I knew the other answers weren't good, and C was too unsupported so I chose A.

[Jonathan Evans]

Hey Khodi!

Thanks for replying and for the detailed explanation of your thought process. Yes, I concur that (D) strictly speaking is not the "opposite" either of the author's viewpoint or the main point. Furthermore, the likelihood of the author's agreement with the statement in (D) is somewhere in the realm of unlikely but still conceivable, i.e. the author might believe that his work shouldn't be thought of primarily as a historically accurate record of events in Tucker's career (although I would argue that his commitment to historical accuracy is part of what facilitates the utility of his work in understanding both Tucker's life and the broader historical events Tucker witnessed).

However, a big takeaway is that, since this is a Must Be True question, (D) fits firmly into the Could Be True incorrect answer category. It is a textbook example of an attractive wrong answer on a question like this, which is why it looks so good, or at least confusing!

Yes, the question asks for an "inference" the passage "most strongly supports," but questions worded this way (most strongly supported) are for all intents and purposes Must Be True questions, and not just because it asks for an "inference." It's true that asking for something the passage "most strongly supports" as opposed to something that "must be true" on the basis of a passage dials back the degree of formal logical certainty, slightly, but this semantic choice often corresponds to the style of the stimulus/passage more than an instruction to adjust your approach. In other words, when you read "most strongly supported" don't think, "well I've gotta find something in the ballpark." No, you still are on a mission to find something that passes the Fact Test™. There must be direct support in the passage for the credited answer choice.

In re your question about #3, I totally get it. I get hung up on certain words or phrases that I find at variance with a corresponding concept in a passage or stimulus. You have to make a judgment call: "Is this word or phrase truly at odds with what I read (a Shell Game situation) or is it an acceptable paraphrase of something in the stimulus/passage?"

There's no easy solution to this issue. Part of your success here is a matter of practice. Part of it is willing yourself to be confident even when you're not feeling it and developing a familiarity with the kinds of "tricks" the LSAC plays to make incorrect answers attractive and credited responses confusing/unattractive.

Bottom line is you got that one right. Own it. Good job!

[BostonLawGuy]

Like many others, I chose D. I did not find any textual evidence for answer choice C.

I am not sure how to navigate the passages as I look for what must be true based on the words in the passage. I suppose we must make assumptions, which is how I get questions wrong. (By making assumptions that are sometimes not true.)

Secondly, I am not sure where in the passage it states that the author's study "provides significant information regarding US entertainment history. I do see that the subject of the study, Lorenzo Tucker's memorabilia "sheds light on the US entertainment history" but there is nothing in the passage that states the author's study will shed such light on the US entertainment industry. Additionally, there is nothing to indicate that the author actually used any of Tucker's memorabilia. In fact, he specifically omits this memorabilia when listing his material used in his study. The first line states that this study will extensively discuss Lorenzo Tucker, but never states it will also discuss or shed light on the US entertainment history. Hence my confusion and why I got this question wrong. I must learn how to make inferences (read the test makes mind) to get the questions right.

I suppose my problem with RC is trying to determine what we can assume and what we cannot. Inferring too much results in wrong answer choices and not inferring enough results in wrong answer choices. Any one have a strategy that works for them?

[James Finch]

Hi Boston Law Guy,

The support for "providing significant information regarding US entertainment history" comes from the first paragraph, especially the last sentence. The author definitely sees Tucker as a good means to look at African-American entertainment history, which falls under the broader scope of "US entertainment history."

I would also caution against assuming anything; what the LSAT is looking for is inferences (or what is very likely to be true) not assumptions, and there must be evidentiary support for those inferences. Sometimes this support is effectively a small, insignificant bit of background info (look at question 7 in this section for the worst example of that!) but usually it is something that is important to the argument being made. So always look back to the text for that support.

Hope this helps!