QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning
CONCLUSION: Music sharing services aren’t to blame.
REASONING: The services deprive musicians of royalties, but recording studios take too large a cut of revenues.
ANALYSIS: This is a common argument in favor of file sharing, but it’s not a good one.
If record companies take too much money, then that’s a problem. But it’s a different problem from file-sharing.
If a musician is entitled to $100,000 in royalties and file sharing takes away $10,000, then file sharing is to blame for that loss, whether or not the original $100,000 was a fair figure.
It’s possible that both file sharing AND record companies deserve blame for taking money from musicians.
- CORRECT. Yes. It’s possible for two separate parties to be blameworthy.
- This is like saying that cocaine is ok because lots of people do it. It’s a different bad argument.
- This describes an ad hominem flaw. The editorialist didn’t attack anyone’s character.
- This is like saying that there is no asteroid coming to hit earth, because then we would all die. It’s a different bad argument.
- This is like saying that someone is a criminal because they drink water. Drinking water is a necessary condition for being criminal (and for staying alive), but it is very far from sufficient. It’s a different bad argument.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly