PT154 S2 Q9 ExplanationEditor: It is a myth

Answer choices, explained

1. A

   Correct75% picked this

   overlooks the possibility that a relatively small number of people can create a significant amount

   Why this is right

   Does it hurt the argument to say that "a small number of people can create a significant amount of new music"? Sure! It's basically doing the classic LSAT move of "your Evidence is compatible with your Conclusion being wrong." The Evidence was that only 1% of people could possibly be contributing to the pool of music that results from downloading others' music, sampling it, and publishing it in a new work of your own. If this small number of people can create a significant amount of new music, then we can say to the author, "See, buddy? There is a significant amount of music that comes from downloading / sampling / publishing."

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

   75%
2. B

   Irrelevant Objection1% picked this

   neglects to consider the ease with which music can be published

   Does it hurt the author's argument to say that "it's wicked easy to publish music on the Internet"? Nope. He would just say, "Cool, well however easy it is, that doesn't change the fact that 99% of people don't do it."

   1%
3. C

   Not a Flaw4% picked this

   fails to provide an alternative account of the sources for most of the music published

   If a defense attorney manages to convince the jury that Tony wasn't the killer, she's done her job. She doesn't also have to solve the crime for the police. Similarly, the author can win his argument by convincing us that most of the music doesn't come from Source X. He doesn't also have to explain for us where most of the music does come from. Alternate explanations definitely can help someone prove that "X wasn't the cause of Y", but they're not necessary. A defense attorney can get Tony off the hook by selling the jury on an alternate story (maybe Tony didn't kill Boris, but rather Boris's disgruntled former employee killed him), but the attorney can also get Tony off the hook by just presenting a clear alibi (the murder happened in Denver on August 1, and Tony was in Paris that night, as all these witnesses testify).

   4%
4. D

   Too Strong: always20% picked this

   presumes, without giving justification, that those who rework downloaded music into new creations always publish those new

   The author doesn't have to assume that in 100% of cases, people who sample downloaded music into their new creations publish it on the Internet. Speaking as someone who knows, a lot of our creations are mediocre so we don't publish them. Also, if we negate this assumption, it wouldn't weaken the author's argument at all. If we said, "You know sometimes people download music into new creations but don't publish it on the Internet", the author would be like, "Yeah, I know. That's part of why I said there isn't a significant amount of music on the Internet that has been downloaded / re-worked / published".

   20%
5. E

   Too Strong1% picked this

   takes for granted that Internet users always prefer music that is original to music that has been downloaded and

   Too Strong: always Out of Scope: prefer What people prefer is totally out of scope. The truth value of this conclusion is merely about the quantity of a certain type of music on the Internet. The author certainly did commit herself to the extreme assumption that in 100% of cases, Internet users prefer original music to music that has downloaded samples in it.

   1%