PrepTest 149, Section 1, Question 22
Advertisement: Hypnosis videos work to alter behavior by(80 more words not shown)
The advertisement's reasoning is most(9 more words not shown)
- Aoverlooks a requirement(11 more words not shown)
- Btakes for granted(22 more words not shown)
- Cconcludes that hypnosis(14 more words not shown)
- Ddraws a conclusion(11 more words not shown)
- Econcludes that hypnosis(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The first command needs to work too.
The advertisement says directions to the subconscious must be repeated many times. Then it tries a shortcut: tell the subconscious to experience later commands as if they were repeated 1,000 times. But why would that initial command take effect without itself being repeated? The proposed shortcut hasn't escaped the requirement the advertisement just gave us.
What we’re looking for
The final claim can sound like another fact we're supposed to accept: the videos are extremely effective. But the advertisement says they are effective because of that initial instruction. That is the conclusion we're evaluating, not independent proof that the shortcut works. For the flaw, I'd return to the missing repetition of the very command on which the promised effect depends.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The stated requirement is that directions must be repeated many times to be effective. The initial instruction is itself a direction to the subconscious, yet the advertisement relies on its effectiveness without showing that this requirement has been met. Telling someone to experience later commands as repeated doesn't explain how the first command becomes effective.
- B
Needing repetition doesn't mean every extra repetition produces a proportional increase in effectiveness. Perhaps a command needs to be repeated 50 times, with little added benefit from going from 100 to 1,000. The advertisement needn't assume a precise relationship between the number of repetitions and the size of the effect. Its problem comes before that: establishing that the initial command works at all.
- C
Calling these videos extremely effective doesn't rank hypnosis above every other way of changing behavior. The advertisement doesn't compare hypnosis with other techniques or conclude that it is the best. C criticizes a comparative claim the advertisement doesn't make.
- D
The conclusion claims that subsequent instructions are extremely effective. The earlier description of issuing a command isn't simply that same claim repeated; it is an attempted explanation of how the effect is produced. The reasoning fails to establish that the initial command works, rather than just using the conclusion as its own premise.
- E
The advertisement doesn't argue that nobody has disproved the videos' effectiveness. It offers an affirmative story about an initial command multiplying the effect of later ones. We should challenge that story's missing step, not replace it with an argument from a lack of disproof.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.