PrepTest 126, Section 1, Question 21
Advertiser: Most TV shows depend on funding from(75 more words not shown)
The advertiser's reasoning most closely(8 more words not shown)
- AIf a TV(23 more words not shown)
- BIf a TV(25 more words not shown)
- CIf a TV(19 more words not shown)
- DIf one feels(25 more words not shown)
- EIf a TV(25 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
If the advertisements don't produce sales, I can see why the advertisers would stop paying. And if a show needs that money to survive, losing it could mean cancellation.
But does that make every fan responsible for buying the products? Suppose the advertisers would be happy if one percent of viewers bought something. Then any particular fan might skip the purchase while enough other viewers kept the advertising worthwhile. Perhaps a fan could also help by watching or encouraging friends to watch. We haven't established that each person's purchase is individually necessary.
What we’re looking for
The question asks which principle the advertiser's reasoning follows, so we need to describe the rule being used, even if we have doubts about it. The argument moves from many people's purchases being needed to a duty for anyone who values the show to buy. In ordinary terms: if keeping something you support depends on enough people participating in an action, you should participate too. Keep the collective requirement and the individual recommendation separate.
Working the answers
- A
This says the show would be canceled unless you, individually, took the action. The advertiser doesn't establish that any one viewer's purchase makes that difference. Enough other viewers could buy the products while you bought nothing. The premise concerns many people acting, not a single indispensable viewer.
- BCorrect
The action is buying the advertised products. Many viewers must do that to preserve the funding, and the advertiser concludes that everyone who thinks the show is worth preserving ought to do it. B preserves both parts: the requirement applies collectively, while the recommendation addresses each supporter.
- C
This changes both whose judgment matters and who has the duty. The argument addresses anyone who feels the show is worth preserving. C treats the show as worth preserving and then places the duty on everyone, including people who don't share that view. That's a broader principle than the argument uses.
- D
Taking some action is too vague. A fan might watch more often or mention the show to friends without buying an advertised product. The advertiser's conclusion specifically recommends the action that the funding depends on. D doesn't capture that connection.
- E
The advertiser doesn't limit the recommendation to the most enthusiastic fans. Anyone who feels the show is worth preserving is included. E introduces a ranking of supporters and restricts the duty to those at the top of it.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.