PrepTest 140, Section 2, Question 3
Humorous television advertisements are the only effective ones.(38 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- AIt takes for(21 more words not shown)
- BIt confuses attracting(16 more words not shown)
- CIt treats a(14 more words not shown)
- DIt uses two(8 more words not shown)
- EIt takes for(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Only funny ads work? I might buy something because the product looks useful and the price is good. The advertisement doesn't necessarily need to make me laugh.
The author gives humor a real advantage: it catches our attention and keeps us watching long enough to get the message. Fine. But could something else do that? Big lettering or a loud opening might draw us in, and an interesting demonstration might keep us watching. We haven't been told that humor is the only way to get a message across.
Now add the final premise: an effective advertisement must convey its message. That tells us what every effective ad needs to accomplish. It doesn't tell us that every effective ad must use humor to accomplish it.
What we’re looking for
For the flaw question, keep the direction clear. The argument gives us one way to convey a message and treats it as the only way. That is the unsupported step behind its claim that only humorous advertisements are effective.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The author assumes that nothing besides humor can attract attention and hold it long enough to convey a message. But another technique could accomplish both tasks. An engaging, completely serious advertisement could get its message across, leaving the author's reason for ruling it out unsupported.
- B
The passage distinguishes catching attention from keeping it: humor supposedly does both. It doesn't assume that briefly attracting someone's attention automatically means holding it long enough to communicate. The problem is ruling out other ways of doing those things.
- C
This describes a different mistake. Conveying the message is necessary for effectiveness, but the author doesn't conclude that any advertisement conveying its message must be effective. Instead, the author takes humor, which can get a message across, and treats humor as required. C switches which condition is being wrongly treated as enough.
- D
There is no change in what “effective” means. Compare calling a crane a bird and then concluding it can lift construction materials: that would slide between two meanings of one word. Here, the disputed step concerns how an ad can communicate, not a hidden change in the meaning of effectiveness.
- E
Saying an advertisement must convey its message to be effective doesn't say that conveying a message is its only purpose. An ad could also aim to sell a product or improve a company's reputation. Those additional purposes wouldn't fix the unsupported claim that humor is the only way to communicate successfully.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.