PrepTest 127, Section 3, Question 10
Concert promoter: Some critics claim that our concert(36 more words not shown)
The concert promoter's argument is(4 more words not shown)
- Aattacks the critics(10 more words not shown)
- Btakes for granted(13 more words not shown)
- Ctakes for granted(7 more words not shown)
- Ddraws a conclusion(14 more words not shown)
- Efails to adequately(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
A concert series could have a small group of devoted fans without broad popular appeal. That might even be enough for the promoter's purposes. So when the critics question the series' appeal, I want evidence about that particular claim, not just evidence that the series has some enthusiastic supporters.
The promoter points to merchandise income that matches or exceeds the income at comparable series. One concern is that devoted fans could buy a lot of shirts and other merchandise even if the audience is quite limited. Strong merchandise sales and broad appeal aren't automatically the same thing.
There is also a question about the comparison itself. Do those other series have popular appeal? Matching an unpopular series would not be much of an answer to the critics. We need to know something about the standard being used before treating success by that standard as proof of popularity.
What we’re looking for
The flaw question asks us to identify a problem in the promoter's reply. The sales figures don't establish that the critics are wrong. That doesn't establish that the critics are right either; it means the promoter still owes us the missing connection.
Working the answers
- A
The promoter cites sales income, which is factual evidence, even if it doesn't prove the intended point. An emotional appeal would look more like saying that an artist changed the promoter's life and therefore must be popular. This reply doesn't rely on that kind of personal reaction.
- B
This comes close to our concern about treating merchandise sales as evidence of popularity. But it goes too far with “sole indicator.” The promoter could believe ticket sales, audience surveys, and merchandise sales all indicate appeal while citing just this one measure here. Using one indicator doesn't require believing it is the only indicator.
- CCorrect
The promoter treats the comparable series as a useful benchmark for popular appeal without establishing that they have it. Suppose an unpopular comparison series sold no shirts and this series sold one. The higher income would hardly answer the critics.
It is like responding to “Ben is short” with “Ben is taller than someone who is five feet two inches.” Ben could be five feet three inches. Being taller than that person wouldn't establish that Ben is tall. Likewise, doing as well as or better than these series doesn't establish popular appeal unless the comparison supplies a suitable standard.
- D
The passage describes the other series as comparable. The problem isn't that the events are said to be dissimilar; it is that their popular appeal hasn't been established. Comparable events can share the very weakness we are trying to rule out.
- E
The conclusion concerns the concert series, and the evidence compares merchandise income across series. There is no claim that a single successful concert establishes that every concert, or the whole series, is popular. E assigns a shift between individual events and the series that the argument does not make.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.