PrepTest 139, Section 4, Question 22
If the magazine's circulation continues to rise as(84 more words not shown)
The argument's reasoning is flawed(3 more words not shown)
- Aidentifies some changes(20 more words not shown)
- Bequates a reduction(17 more words not shown)
- Cdraws a conclusion(13 more words not shown)
- Dtakes a single(17 more words not shown)
- Etreats an occurrence(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Slower growth might still be fast enough to reach first place.
The first sentence gives us a sure route to becoming the largest-selling martial arts magazine: keep growing at the old rate for another ten years. We're then told that, without the editor's proposed changes, growth will be slower. Accept that. Why couldn't the magazine still pass its competitors? Perhaps it only needs half its previous growth to catch them.
The mistake becomes clearer in an extreme comparison. If being eaten by a shark would kill someone, avoiding that fate doesn't make the person immortal. There are other ways to die. Similarly, losing one sure route to first place doesn't eliminate every way to get there.
What we’re looking for
For the flaw question, look for the argument treating the old growth rate as required, when the premise only tells us that it would be enough.
Working the answers
- A
The argument does say the proposed changes are needed to maintain the old growth rate. But it doesn't conclude that no other changes are needed. Its conclusion is about failing to become the largest-selling magazine. A substitutes a different conclusion about which changes are sufficient.
- B
A slower increase is different from a decline, but the argument doesn't confuse those here. It says the magazine will fail to reach first place, not that its circulation will fall. The actual problem is assuming that growing more slowly prevents it from reaching that rank.
- C
The conclusion isn't a restatement of the premises. “Growth will be slower” and “we won't be number one” are different claims. A magazine could grow slowly and still finish first. The unsupported connection between them is what needs criticism.
- D
No incompatible fact is being used to disprove a general claim. Slower future growth doesn't contradict the original statement that maintaining the old rate would ensure first place. The argument accepts that statement and then makes an additional inference about what happens when the old rate isn't maintained.
- ECorrect
Continuing the old rate of growth is the occurrence that would ensure the outcome of becoming the largest-selling magazine. The author treats that rate as though the outcome requires it. But “this much growth will get us there” doesn't mean “any less growth will keep us out.” Without knowing what slower growth would do relative to the competitors, the conclusion doesn't follow.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.