PrepTest 140, Section 3, Question 18
A recent magazine article argued that most companies(47 more words not shown)
The reasoning in the argument(6 more words not shown)
- Aconcludes that something(14 more words not shown)
- Btakes a condition(20 more words not shown)
- Crejects a position(13 more words not shown)
- Drelies on a(18 more words not shown)
- Econfuses the cost(9 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The companies that bought the equipment might be exactly the companies that need it.
Imagine a law firm or marketing company that regularly meets with clients remotely. Videoconferencing could be worth the money for that business. A small pet store with no comparable need might sensibly leave it unpurchased. These are hypothetical examples, not claims that every business in those industries behaves the same way.
The magazine's claim concerns companies that don't already own the equipment. The survey asks companies that do. Their purchasing decisions may reflect different needs, so satisfied buyers don't automatically tell us whether the nonbuyers would benefit.
What we’re looking for
That is the flaw I'd look for: the author transfers the experience of a selected group to a different group without establishing that the relevant circumstances match. We can believe the survey respondents and still question the conclusion drawn about companies outside that survey.
Working the answers
- A
The evidence isn't merely that businesses purchased the equipment. Most respondents also said it was worth the cost. A leaves out that reported satisfaction, which is the basis for the author's defense. The actual problem is applying those buyers' experience to nonbuyers.
- B
The author doesn't identify a condition that justifies a purchase and then treat that condition as the only way a purchase can be justified. The reasoning relies on a survey of existing owners. B doesn't describe the transfer from that sample to businesses without the equipment.
- C
The author doesn't say, 'The magazine argued badly, so its conclusion must be false.' Instead, the author offers supposed counterevidence: purchasers say the equipment was worth the money. We need to criticize that evidence's relevance to the target group, not an attack on the magazine's reasoning that never appears.
- DCorrect
The surveyed purchasers may be unrepresentative of the companies the magazine discusses. Businesses with a strong use for videoconferencing are more likely to have bought it already; businesses without that use may be among those still without it. That difference gives us a reason to doubt the sample's relevance, not merely the observation that two groups have different names.
- E
Asking whether something was worth its cost distinguishes its value from its price. Respondents are saying the benefits justified the expense, not that the two concepts mean the same thing. We can accept their judgment for their own businesses without accepting the author's broader inference.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.