Logical Reasoning

PT149 · S1 · Q22 Advertisement: Hypnosis videos work

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

Advertisement: Hypnosis videos work to alter behavior by subliminally directing the subconscious to act in certain ways.

Conclusion

Subsequent instructions on Mesmosis videos are extremely effective.

Evidence

To be effective, instructions given to the subconscious must be repeated many times.

Intermediate Conclusion

For the listener, it's as though those subsequent instructions have been repeated 1,000 times.

Evidence (because)

Once a hypnotic state has been induced, the first instruction given to the listener's subconscious is to experience each subsequent instruction as if it had actually been repeated 1,000 times.

Evaluate

The 2nd sentence of the argument is a conditional, . Whenever we see a Flaw question that has a conditional logic premise, we want to immediately be on guard for the #1 Famous Flaw Necessary vs. Sufficient

This rule says: Effective → Repeated Many Times

An argument committing the Nec vs. Suff flaw would proceed to argue via an Illegal Reversal (This thing repeats many times. Thus, it must be effective) or via an Illegal Negation (This thing isn't effective. Thus, it must not repeat many times).

This argument does do the former. It attempts to establish that Mesmosis provides instructions that are "repeated" 1,000 times. And it then concludes that those instructions are very effective. So we could definitely bust this author on assuming that a condition required for effectiveness (repeated many times) is also sufficient for effectiveness.

But there's another Famous Flaw lurking in here too, the much more rare Self Contradiction, or at least Self-Undermining. We are told that a direction to the subconscious is effective only if it's repeated many times.

If it's not repeated many times, then it's not effective.

The Mesmosis videos hypnotize someone and then issue an initial command (seemingly only once): interpret each command that follows as though you've heard it 1,000 times.

Well according to the author's own provided rule, since the initial command isn't repeated many times, we have no reason to think that it will be effective, so we have no reason to think that people will actually treat subsequent instructions like they've been said 1,000 times.

Goal

Look for an answer calling out the Necessary vs. Sufficient conflation, or look for an answer calling out the fact that the author's own provided rule undermines the scheme by which these videos are supposed to work.

22.

The advertisement's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the advertisement

  1. Correct

    overlooks a requirement that it

    Why this is right

    Normally, when Flaw answers begin with fails to consider / overlooks the possibility, we read them more or less like answer choices on Weaken: if true, could this hurt the argument? could I use this idea as an objection? In this case, could we use the stated requirement for effectiveness as an objection? Yes! This gets to the Self-Undermining flaw we were pointing out. The ad states that "if something isn't repeated many times, it's not effective". That rule basically ruins the way the videos supposedly work. Supposedly, the initial command to experience everything as though it's been said 1,000 times is why these videos work so well. But the initial command isn't repeated many times, so it won't be effective. People won't actually follow its instruction, so they won't experience each subsequent instruction as though it was said 1,000 times.

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

    56% picked this

  2. takes for granted that the

    Too Strong: always directly proportional

    When answers start with takes for granted / presumes / fails to establish, we're just asking ourselves, "DID the author actually make this assumption?" We can't accuse this argument of committing to the idea that effectiveness is always directly proportional to number of times. That's Volume Dial language (the more x, the more y). We were only told in absolute language "if not repeated many times, not effective". The author doesn't need to assume that 20,000 repetition are precisely two times as effective as 10,000 repetitions.

    23% picked this

  3. concludes that hypnosis is the

    Bad Conclusion Match

    Does the author conclude that hypnosis is the most effective technique for altering behavior? Not at all. The conclusion is "the subsequent instructions on Mesmosis videos are extremely effective". This answer is borrowing language from the first sentence of the stimulus, which was just a background claim.

    2% picked this

  4. draws a conclusion that simply

    Not Circular

    This describes the famous Circular Reasoning flaw, which is almost never the correct answer. Circular arguments are ones in which the evidence restates or assumes the truth of the conclusion. The conclusion here was that "the subsequent instructions on Mesmosis videos are extremely effective". Was there a premise that also said that? Definitely not.

    17% picked this

  5. concludes that hypnosis videos will

    Trap

    Bad Evidence Match Not Unproven vs. Proven False This alludes to the famous Unproven vs. Proven False flaw, but the evidence in this argument has nothing to do with saying "No one has ever proven that hypnosis videos are ineffective".

    2% 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