PrepTest 157, Section 3, Question 19

What we’re looking for

Working the answers

• A

  The chain is good story, then critical praise, then box-office success. But this argument starts its final inference at the end: the film wasn't successful at the box office. If a good story really guaranteed praise and that praise guaranteed success, a film lacking the final result couldn't have had the starting condition. This follows the stated guarantees. The original instead denies the starting condition and incorrectly rules out the result.

• B
  Correct

  Several stars correspond to festival acceptance; box-office success corresponds to a distributor buying the film; a long theater run corresponds to recovering the investment. Each first step guarantees the next.

  Now notice what “only one star” does: it rules out having several stars. That's the missing starting condition, just like not being accepted by the festival. The argument concludes there won't be a long theater run, ruling out the final result. But a film with one star—or no stars—might be successful for another reason and stay in theaters a long time. The guarantees establish one route, not the only route. All the important pieces match.

• C

  The chain is talented director, then critical praise, then success on video. This film has the final result, and the argument concludes it had the starting condition. That is also flawed: a film might succeed on video for another reason. But it's a different mistake. C observes the last thing and claims the first; the original denies the first thing and rules out the last.

• D

  The two rules don't even join properly. Box-office success leads to an award nomination, while receiving an award leads to success on video. Being nominated and actually receiving an award are different events. We can't silently turn them into the same middle step.

  There is another mismatch: the final inference starts with a star not being nominated, rather than with the film lacking box-office success. It denies something from the middle of the proposed route instead of the first condition. The original has a connected chain and denies its beginning. D changes both features.

• E

  A big budget leads to heavy promotion, which leads to release throughout the country. The film does have the big budget, so this argument follows the chain to the guaranteed release. That's a valid use of the rules. To mimic the original mistake, it would need to say the film lacked a big budget and therefore couldn't get a nationwide release. It doesn't say that.