Consumer advocate: Last year’s

Answer choices

1. A

   Not Circular Reasoning1% picked this

   restates its conclusion without attempting to offer a reason to

   This answer describes the famous Circular Reasoning flaw, in which the evidence restates or assumes the truth of the conclusion. A circular argument has no actual premises/reasons for accepting the conclusion, but this argument clearly had a reason (Only 1000 cases of damage worldwide. Thus, it was just a marketing ploy.)

   1%
2. B

   Irrelevant Rebuttal6% picked this

   fails to acknowledge that antivirus programs might protect against viruses other than the

   Because this answer starts with a fails to consider / overlooks the possibility phrase, we can ask ourselves whether the idea that follows would Weaken. But we can't weaken this argument by talking about other viruses. The conclusion is only about whether the hysteria over this virus was legit or just a marketing ploy. (This answer would be an appropriate objection if the argument had been, "This antivirus software clearly didn't seem to matter against this highly publicized virus. Thus, this antivirus software was a waste of money." For this argument, we could object, "Hey, just because the software wasn't needed against that virus, it might still have value by protecting against other ones.")

   6%
3. C

   Not Causal Flaw4% picked this

   asserts that the occurrence of one event after another shows that the earlier event was the cause

   This answer choice describes the famous Causal Flaw, in particular a case where the author goes from a Before / After relationship to a causal one. X happened. Then Y did. So apparently, X caused Y. This argument is concluding that "desire to stimulate sales" was the cause of "promoting the danger of this forthcoming virus". The evidence never asserted that there was a desire to stimulate sales, and then the companies started raising concern about the virus.

   4%
4. D

   Not Inappropriate Appeal to Emotion1% picked this

   uses inflammatory language as a substitute for providing

   This answer describes something resembling the famous Inappropriate Appeal flaw, one version of which is using emotional language as substitute for reasons. We've never seen LSAT use "inflammatory language" as a substitute for evidence, and we probably never will. They're too politically correct. It would make them nervous to try writing that sort of flawed argument. This author definitely presents evidence: only 1000 cases of damage reported around the world.

   1%
5. E

   Correct88% picked this

   overlooks the possibility that the protective steps taken did work and, for many computers, prevented the

   Why this is right

   Because this answer starts with a fails to consider / overlooks the possibility phrase, we can ask ourselves whether the idea that follows would Weaken. Yes it would. We can say, "Hey, author, the protective steps people took in buying antivirus programs successfully prevented their computers from getting this advertised virus. That's why there were only 1000 cases of reported damage. The companies weren't doing some marketing ploy. There was an actual threat; they sold people an actual solution that worked; and so there wasn't much of a problem that came to fruition." (People old enough to remember the Y2K hysteria in 1999 probably recognized the form of this argument)

   Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   88%