Logical Reasoning

PT102 · S2 · Q9 Consumer advocate: Last year’s

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Consumer advocate: Last year’s worldwide alarm about a computer “virus”—a surreptitiously introduced computer program that can destroy other programs and data—was a fraud.

Conclusion (so)

The companies' warning was clearly only an effort to stimulate sales.

Intermediate Conclusion

The warning that there would be a threatening computer virus activated on a certain date was a fraud.

Evidence

Only about a thousand cases of damage were reported around the world. Meanwhile, multitudes of antivirus programs were sold.

Evaluate

Given that ... only about a thousand cases of damage were reported around the world,

How could we argue that ... the companies warning of a destructive virus that would be activated on a certain date were not publicizing a fraudulent fear in order to stimulate sales?

If the companies sincerely believed that the world needed to be concerned about this computer virus, how can we square that with only 1000 cases of damage?

- maybe those 1000 cases of damage happen to be at the most important facilities (nuclear weapons launch computers / hospital computers / computers that control the water or electric supply), so even though they're small in number, they could still pose lots of trouble for the world because of their importance

- maybe the antivirus programs that were sold were just super effective at blocking the virus. If the software worked and if most people bought it, then there wouldn't be that many exposed computers for the virus to infect.

Goal

Look for an answer that resists the overconfident causal story the author is portraying. She's utterly convinced that this whole computer virus hysteria was a fraudulent marketing ploy, since only 1000 cases of damage occurred.

We need to suggest that other possible explanations exist, by arguing that it's possible that there was a legitimate global concern even though only 1000 cases of damage were reported.

9.

The reasoning in the consumer advocate's argument is flawed because this argument

  1. restates its conclusion without attempting

    Not Circular Reasoning

    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% picked this

  2. fails to acknowledge that antivirus

    Irrelevant Rebuttal

    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% picked this

  3. asserts that the occurrence of

    Not Causal Flaw

    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% picked this

  4. uses inflammatory language as a

    Not Inappropriate Appeal to Emotion

    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% picked this

  5. Correct

    overlooks the possibility that 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% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free