PrepTest 103, Section 3, Question 13
Using rational argument in advertisements does not persuade(29 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(13 more words not shown)
- APeople who ask(22 more words not shown)
- BIn the past,(31 more words not shown)
- CUsing a computer(20 more words not shown)
- DA person who(30 more words not shown)
- EPeople never learn(22 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Maybe the emotional appeal fails too.
I'll accept the premise that rational arguments don't persuade these buyers. But that only tells us one approach doesn't work. Where is the evidence that replacing it with an emotional appeal will work?
Imagine someone dislikes going to baseball games. Does that guarantee they'll enjoy a soccer game? Maybe they dislike watching sports altogether. Changing the activity doesn't automatically fix whatever made the first one unsuccessful.
What we’re looking for
The parallel-flaw question asks us to carry that mistake into a new situation. Rational appeals are the unsuccessful approach, emotional appeals are the replacement, and persuading buyers is the desired result. We need an argument that treats the first approach's failure as enough to guarantee the second approach's success.
Working the answers
- A
This reasoning works under its stated rule. If everyone who asks for a favor is refused, someone who has never been refused cannot have asked for a favor. A works backward from the absence of the required result to rule out the action. It doesn't claim that a different way of asking will succeed.
- B
This keeps the same approach—discussing problems—and predicts that its failures will continue. The change is from past to future, not from an unsuccessful strategy to a replacement strategy guaranteed to work. To match the original, B would need to claim that not discussing the problems will solve them.
- C
Using a computer is the unsuccessful approach, and improving writing is the goal. But C only recommends abandoning that approach. It doesn't promise that writing without a computer, or using some other method, will improve the students' writing. Rejecting the first method isn't the full mistake; the unsupported guarantee for the replacement is missing.
- D
This is tempting because it moves from lacking positive references to having better references. It also goes beyond its evidence. But the conclusion is a graded claim: the better the letters, the better the job. The original doesn't say that increasingly emotional advertisements will produce increasingly strong persuasion. It simply guarantees success after a switch of approaches. D's added comparison of degrees makes it a less exact match.
- ECorrect
Poorly written directions match rational appeals: the first approach never achieves the goal. Well-written directions match emotional appeals: the replacement is then declared successful. Learning to program matches persuading the buyer.
But failure with poor directions doesn't guarantee success with good ones. A person could still struggle to learn, just as a buyer could remain unpersuaded by emotional advertising. Both arguments assume that replacing the unsuccessful approach is enough to secure the desired result.
More Parallel Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Parallel Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.