Historian: Radio drama requires its listeners to think about what they

Question

Historian: Radio drama requires its listeners to think about what they hear, picturing for themselves such dramatic elements as characters’ physical appearances and spatial relationships. Hence, while earlier generations, for whom radio drama was the dominant form of popular entertainment, regularly exercised their imaginations, today’s generation of television viewers do so less frequently.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the historian’s argument?

(A) People spend as much time watching television today as people spent listening to radio in radio’s heyday.

(B) The more familiar a form of popular entertainment becomes, the less likely its consumers are to exercise their imaginations.

(C) Because it inhibits the development of creativity, television is a particularly undesirable form of popular entertainment.

(D) For today’s generation of television viewers, nothing fills the gap left by radio as a medium for exercising the imagination.

(E) Television drama does not require its viewers to think about what they see.

Source: LSAT 60

carolinexi · Accepted Answer

I was also stuck between D and E, and then realized that probably the key here is 'imagination' and not just mere 'thinking'. Because D plugs in the gap about the lack of imagination, whereas E is just making a generalised statement, requiring us to make the additional assumption that 'thinking' about something must be a part of 'imagination', I went for D.

SonalSinha803 · Answer

I would go with option D as it clearly states the assumption as to why the author thinks that today's generation use less of their imagination.

Sent from my Lenovo K53a48 using  GMAT Club Forum mobile app

stickman · Answer

Is E wrong because of the 'drama' bit after Television? In the argument we are concerned with tv viewers, but the AC narrows it to TV drama viewers?

stickman · Answer

Ah yes - okay that is a much stronger case for why E is wrong than what I had thought.

Tanya678929 · Answer

Between E and D: E contradicts the information in the para. The para says "today’s generation of television viewers exercise their imagination less frequently". Nowhere it says that the tv viewers don't exercise the imagination at all. Also, the language of E makes a bit of broader stretch from "using imagination" wording to "not think about what they see". All from above makes E incorrect.

Arro44 · Answer

nightblade354

Mate, I think I found another LSAT problem.

(I come across most of these via the "Daily Practice Questions" functions)

Regards,
Chris

grb26 · Answer

I will go with option D as it talks about imagination, option E instead talks about thinking.

nightblade354 · Answer

Bumping this one for discussion as well. Really a great LSAT question that forces you to not make further assumptions.

GmatPrime · Answer

Dissecting given options:
A). No comparison of time given. Out of scope.
B). Again, not stated anywhere. Out of scope.
C). Judgement. Not in the passage.
D). Let's counter this: If something else is filling the gap and lets people exercise their imaginations (eg.- iPad, smartphones, PC, etc.); then only would the author's argument be valid. This is precisely the option we are looking for.  CORRECT .
E). It says ' does not ' whereas the author is assuming ' less than what radio drama does '. You get the point.

Hope it helps.

GmatPrime · Answer

D). Let's counter this: If something else is filling the gap and lets people exercise their imaginations (eg.- iPad, smartphones, PC, etc.); then only would the author's argument be valid. This is precisely the option we are looking for.  CORRECT .
E). It says  'does not'  whereas the author is assuming  'less than what radio drama does' . You get the point.

Hope it helps.

popovarseniy · Answer

I can't grasp why D. As I've understood, the argument says that viewers do exercises of imagination merely less frequently; it doesn't mean that people stopped doing the picturing. If we negate option D, it says "something fills the gap left by radio as a medium for exercising the imagination" So what? Something fills the gap but probably people are not interested in picturing dramatic elements?

Abhishek009 · Answer

The author states : People are not using creative power/imagination for visualizing characters’ physical appearances and spatial relationships in today’s generation of television viewers as they did during the radio listeners of earlier times... Now comes the point : Mark the word , today’s generation of television viewers , it doesn't mention TV viewers, it generalizes hence, generation of television viewers may include iPad users , smartphones users , PC users , etc. and mark my words there are opportunities for imagination.... What do you say about an Audio Book ? (There are many here https://www.loyalbooks.com/ ).... Thus, (D) can not be negated and must be our Answer !!!!

CEdward · Answer

Man these LSAT questions are tough. Can someone explain why B is incorrect?

Historian: Radio drama requires its listeners to think about what they hear, picturing for themselves such dramatic elements as characters’ physical appearances and spatial relationships. Hence, while earlier generations, for whom radio drama was the dominant form of popular entertainment, regularly exercised their imaginations, today’s generation of television viewers do so less frequently.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the historian’s argument?

(A) People spend as much time watching television today as people spent listening to radio in radio’s heyday.

No...the argument involves a comparison between radio listeners and tv watchers and suggests that earlier generations exercised their imaginations more frequently b/c they had to think about what they heard. The assumption has to somehow bridge these ideas. There’s a leap in logic here. That people spend as much time watching tv today as those listening to radio yesterday does not drive this argument forward and there is no logical connection.

(B) The more familiar a form of popular entertainment becomes, the less likely its consumers are to exercise their imaginations.

Correct! What tv viewers have in front of them are visuals…they are not conditioned to use their imaginations as often as those who listen to the radio b/c presumably the content of the programs that they watch are defined by enduring features (e.g. the same character will often wear the same clothes, live on the same street, etc.)

(C) Because it inhibits the development of creativity, television is a particularly undesirable form of popular entertainment.

This is plausible, but it doesn’t help to tie the argument together. We’re still left wondering why tv viewers use their imaginations less frequently.

(D) For today’s generation of television viewers, nothing fills the gap left by radio as a medium for exercising the imagination.

This seems to strengthen the argument, but again how did I get to the conclusion?

(E) Television drama does not require its viewers to think about what they see.

This is about as tempting as a choice could possibly get. I didn’t pick this one because fundamentally the conclusion is about exercising one’s imagination. It’s possible that one can think about what they see yet not use imagination. So for that reason, we can negate this and the argument would still work.

P: Radio drama requires listeners to think
C: Earlier generations regularly exercised imaginations and today’s tv viewers do so less

unraveled · Answer

Historian: Radio drama requires its listeners to think about what they hear, picturing for themselves such dramatic elements as characters’ physical appearances and spatial relationships. Hence, while earlier generations, for whom radio drama was the dominant form of popular entertainment, regularly exercised their imaginations, today’s generation of television viewers do so less frequently.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the historian’s argument?

(A) People  spend as much time  watching television today as people spent listening to radio in radio’s heyday.

(B) The  more familiar  a form of popular entertainment becomes, the less likely its consumers are to exercise their imaginations.

(C) Because it inhibits the development of creativity, television is a particularly  undesirable form  of popular entertainment.

(D) For today’s generation of television viewers, nothing fills the gap left by radio as a medium for exercising the imagination.

(E) Television drama  does not require its viewers to think  about what they see.

Clearly, D and E are the two contenders. The difference between two forms of entertainment is that one requires its listeners to think about what they hear, picturing for themselves such dramatic elements as characters’ physical appearances and spatial relationships and other(TV) does not.
Note that TV viewers do think but 'less frequently' - here it plays a role of modifier for exercising imaginations - compared o Radio listeners.

Hence E with its strong words that TV drama does not require them to think is plain wrong. This was tough one though between the two though.

Answer D.

rak08 · Answer

KarishmaB   egmat   GMATNinja

can you please help why not b
on negation The more familiar a form of popular entertainment becomes, the not less likely its consumers are to exercise their imaginations.

so basically consumers are still equally likely or more to exercise imagination

egmat · Answer

Hi rak08,

Great question! Let me help you understand why (B) doesn't work here.
 The Core Issue with Your Reasoning:
 When you negate (B), you're correct that it becomes: "The more familiar a form of entertainment becomes, consumers are NOT less likely to exercise imagination" (i.e., familiarity doesn't reduce imagination exercise).

But here's the key insight:  the argument never discusses "familiarity" in the first place.

What the Argument Actually Says:
 The historian's logic is:

- Radio drama inherently requires listeners to imagine things (characters' appearances, spatial relationships)
- Earlier generations consumed radio drama as their dominant entertainment → they exercised imagination regularly
- Today's generation consumes television → they exercise imagination less frequently

The argument is about the  intrinsic nature of the medium (radio requires imagination; TV presumably doesn't), NOT about how familiar people become with any medium over time.

Why (B) is Out of Scope:
 
Choice (B) introduces a completely new concept — that familiarity with ANY entertainment reduces imagination. But the argument doesn't depend on this at all. The historian isn't saying "people got too familiar with radio, so they stopped imagining." The historian is saying "radio, by its very nature, forces you to imagine — television doesn't."

Even if we assume (B) is false (familiarity doesn't reduce imagination), the argument still stands perfectly because the argument was never about familiarity in the first place!

A Parallel Scenario to Make This Crystal Clear:
 
Imagine this argument:
"Cooking from scratch requires people to learn knife skills, while ordering takeout does not. Hence, earlier generations who cooked from scratch regularly developed knife skills, but today's generation who orders takeout do so less frequently."

Now consider this as an answer choice for "What is an assumption?":
- "The more convenient a method of obtaining food becomes, the less likely people are to develop knife skills."

Does this sound tempting?  Sure! But notice — the argument never discusses convenience as a factor. The argument is purely about the inherent nature of cooking (requires knives) vs. takeout (doesn't require knives).

Even if convenience had NOTHING to do with skill development, the argument still holds: cooking inherently requires knife skills, takeout doesn't, so people who cook develop those skills while people who order takeout don't.

Similarly, in our radio/TV question, the argument is about the inherent nature of radio (requires imagination) vs. TV (doesn't require it the same way). Familiarity is simply not part of the reasoning chain.

Why (D) is the Correct Answer:
 
The argument assumes that TV viewers don't have something ELSE that fills the imagination gap left by radio. If today's generation had another activity that exercised their imagination as much as radio did, then the conclusion (that they exercise imagination less frequently) would collapse.

Negate (D): "Something DOES fill the gap left by radio for exercising imagination." → This destroys the conclusion, because now TV viewers could be exercising their imaginations through that other activity.

Key Takeaway:

For the negation test to work, the answer choice must address reasoning that is relevant to the argument's logic, not just concepts that sound related. Choice (B) introduces "familiarity" — a line of reasoning the argument never relies on — so negating it has no impact on the argument's validity.

Hope this helps! Let me know if you have further questions.

rak08 · Answer

egmat 
Thank you so much!

Yeah i think i was flown away with words & didn't cross-check whether the factor is strictly used in the passage.
However passage did say "radio --- dominant form of entertainment, then continued to talk about today's gen & tv" so i thought it might be fair to infer.
However what made me more drawn is with option D, TV viewers  don't  have something ELSE that fills the imagination gap left by radio.
however we can't say it "completely" fills it
so it can be true even post negation that the conclusion does not break, there is a reduction in their imagination/creatives.

egmat · Answer

Hi rak08,

Let me zoom out and make sure we're seeing the full picture before diving into negation.

The Argument's Structure:

Fact 1:  Radio drama requires listeners to IMAGINE things (appearances, spatial relationships)
 Fact 2:  Earlier generations → radio was dominant → they exercised imagination regularly 
 Fact 3:  Today's generation → TV is dominant
 Conclusion:  Today's generation exercises imagination  LESS FREQUENTLY

The Logic Chain:

Radio requires imagination
→ People who consumed radio exercised imagination
→ Radio is gone (replaced by TV)
→  Therefore:  imagination exercise is reduced

Do You See the Leap?

The historian jumps from "radio is gone" to "less imagination exercise."

But why should that follow?

It ONLY follows if we assume:  Nothing else makes today's generation exercise their imagination.

If they read novels, play D&D, listen to podcasts, do creative hobbies, play imagination-heavy games... they COULD be exercising imagination just as much — just through a different medium.

Your Specific Concern:

You said: "Even if something fills the gap, maybe it doesn't  completely  fill it."

Here's the key insight:

The assumption isn't "nothing COMPLETELY replaces radio."
The assumption is "nothing SERVES AS a medium for imagination exercise."

These are different:

• "Nothing completely fills the gap" → Other things exist, just not as good
• "Nothing fills the gap" → No other imagination-exercising medium exists AT ALL

Analogy:

The argument is like saying:
"Gyms used to be dominant for exercise. Gyms closed. Therefore people exercise less."

Hidden assumption: "Nothing else serves as a way to exercise."

If home workouts, running, yoga, or sports exist — the conclusion falls apart. It doesn't matter if they're "as good as" the gym. They just need to  exist .

Same here: (D) assumes no other imagination medium exists. If  anything  exercises their imagination, you can't conclude they imagine "less frequently" without measuring.

Bottom Line:

The word "completely" doesn't appear in (D). The assumption is simply:  no alternative exists .

If an alternative exists (even an imperfect one), the conclusion that they exercise imagination "less frequently" becomes unsupported — you'd need actual data to compare.

Answer: D

Does this framing make the argument's structure clearer?

vv65 · Answer

Negation is often useful, but it isn't a necessary step in every assumption question.

Understanding the logic of the argument IS essential. For that we need to slow down and read carefully.

The argument talks about how much consumers need to exercise their imaginations when listening to radio drama (which has no visuals), and how little imagination is needed when watching TV.

The argument does not link imagination to the familiarity of popular entertainment mediums. So B is not relevant to the argument, and negating B is no use.

Historian: Radio drama requires its listeners to think about what they

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Historian: Radio drama requires its listeners to think about what they

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards