LR Drill Set 6, Question 2
Advertisement: Medican antiwrinkle cream helps people live longer.(22 more words not shown)
A flaw in the advertisement's(5 more words not shown)
- Afails to compare(13 more words not shown)
- Bbases a general(17 more words not shown)
- Cfails to consider(15 more words not shown)
- Dfails to consider(13 more words not shown)
- Eattempts to establish(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
A wrinkle cream that helps people live longer? That's a much bigger claim than making skin look smoother.
Let's accept the study's result: regular Medican users live several years longer on average than nonusers. We still have to ask what else differs between those groups. Perhaps people who buy the cream have more money and better access to care. Perhaps people attentive to their appearance also exercise more or eat well. Those possibilities could connect cream use with longer lives without making the cream responsible.
The cream might genuinely help. But a difference between users and nonusers doesn't isolate its effect. Imagine that the users already had healthier habits before buying their first jar. Their longer lives could persist even if the cream did nothing beyond moisturizing their skin.
What we’re looking for
So for the flaw question, I want the ignored alternative explanation: other characteristics of Medican users could account for their longevity.
Working the answers
- A
The claim is that Medican helps people live longer, not that it beats competing creams. Another cream might work better, worse, or equally well without settling whether Medican has the advertised benefit. Failing to compare brands is therefore not the gap between these study results and this conclusion.
- B
How many people did the studies include? We aren't told. A small sample could be a concern in another argument, but we cannot treat an unreported sample size as proof that this one was too small. The alternative explanation problem remains even if the studies included thousands of users.
- CCorrect
Other facts about regular users could explain the whole longevity difference. If they exercise more, eat differently, or have resources that improve their health, those factors could produce longer lives while also being associated with cream use. The advertisement gives the cream credit without showing that these other differences aren't doing the work. We don't have to prove a particular alternative true to see that the evidence hasn't ruled it out.
- D
A general rise in life expectancy before the product existed would concern a change over time. The study compares users with nonusers, and the argument tries to explain the difference between them. Everyone could benefit from a broader trend while the users still outlived the nonusers for separate reasons. D doesn't address that particular gap.
- E
The evidence is not impossible to check. Researchers can gather data on cream use and lifespan, compare groups, and examine other relevant differences. A further study could challenge the claimed association or its proposed explanation. The problem is the inference drawn from the evidence, not that the evidence is beyond investigation.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.