Logical Reasoning

PT126 · S1 · Q3 Durth: Increasingly, businesses use

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

Durth: Increasingly, businesses use direct mail advertising instead of paying for advertising space in newspapers, in magazines, or on billboards.

Conclusion

Using direct mail instead of ad space in media is annoying and immoral.

Evidence

Most direct mail is never read and simply trashed. Wasting this much paper is unconscionable.

Evaluation

How would we describe the move or the type of evidence in general terms? The author is criticizing a practice by pointing out undesirable consequences. The last sentence also appeals to our sense of consistent judgment: “If anyone did this, we’d shame them”

Goal

Look for something like

3.

Which one of the following most accurately describes Durth's method of reasoning?

  1. presenting a specific counterexample to

    Out Of Scope: “counterexample”

    There is no counterexample. Examples are specific person / places / things. This answer would be correct if the argument had said, “Some people say direct mail isn’t immoral, but consider the case of Company X (who direct mailed, immorally)”.

    1% picked this

  2. asserting that there would be

    Out Of Scope: “more widespread practice”

    The author does discuss undesirable consequences of direct mail, but she never asserts anything about what would occur if the practice were more widespread.

    4% picked this

  3. Correct

    claiming that direct mail advertising

    Why this is right

    The claim = the conclusion. Because = the evidence. The author’s conclusion was that direct mail is immoral (and annoying). Part of the evidence, the last sentence, was that in any other context if you wasted this much paper you’d be chastised for it.

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

    90% picked this

  4. basing a conclusion on the

    Bad Premise Match

    No, the conclusion mentions it being annoying, but none of the evidence (the basis) talks about direct mail being annoying. Nothing in the evidence compares the negative effects of direct mail to those of other types of advertising.

    2% picked this

  5. asserting that other advertising methods

    Bad Premise Match

    Nothing in the evidence compares the negative effects of direct mail to those of other types of advertising.

    3% 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