PrepTest 142, Section 1, Question 5
Critic: Fillmore, an influential television executive, argues that(53 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AIt takes a(14 more words not shown)
- BIt concludes that(15 more words not shown)
- CIt rejects an(18 more words not shown)
- DIt is based(15 more words not shown)
- EIt bases its(9 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Fillmore has a reason to want parents to let their children watch television. That makes me cautious about accepting his advice. It doesn't settle whether his advice is good.
There are questions we could ask about his argument itself. Children might learn from an educational program, while a violent show could be a different story. And saying television can teach something useful doesn't establish that every child benefits or that regular viewing has no harmful effects.
But the critic doesn't make those objections. The critic grants that children can learn beneficial things, then rejects Fillmore's argument because persuading parents would benefit Fillmore.
What we’re looking for
What if he benefits from giving accurate advice? A financial interest and a sound argument can coexist. For the flaw question, focus on that move from the speaker's motive to rejecting what he says.
Working the answers
- A
The critic doesn't confuse a requirement for harm with something that guarantees harm. That would look like treating one thing needed for a harmful outcome as enough to produce it. Here the reason for rejecting the argument is Fillmore's personal benefit, not a rule about conditions that produce harm.
- B
The critic isn't relying on an absence of contrary evidence. There is a stated reason for rejection: Fillmore stands to benefit from persuading parents. We should question whether that reason addresses the argument, but it isn't the same as saying a claim is true because nobody has disproved it.
- CCorrect
The critic rejects the argument solely because it serves the speaker's interests. Fillmore might benefit if parents accept a sound argument, just as he might benefit if they accept a bad one. His motive gives us a reason to examine the reasoning carefully; it doesn't replace that examination. We don't need to defend Fillmore's argument to recognize that this particular attack fails.
- D
Appealing to someone's views means using those views as support. The critic does the opposite with Fillmore: the critic rejects his argument. No other authority is offered as a reason to accept the critic's conclusion.
- E
Which claims cannot both be true? Children could learn useful things from television, and Fillmore could benefit from persuading their parents to let them watch. Those facts fit together perfectly well. The problem is what the critic infers from Fillmore's incentive, not a contradiction among the premises.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.