LSAT 103 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q13

LR Question 13 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Using rational argument in advertisements does not persuade people…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning

CONCLUSION: Emotional arguments in advertisements will persuade people to buy.

REASONING: Rational, non-emotional arguments in advertisements don’t persuade people to buy.

ANALYSIS: There’s another possibility: maybe emotional arguments won’t work either. Maybe no advertisements are good at persuading people to buy.

Abstractly, here’s the flaw: Just because something doesn’t work, you can’t say that its opposite will work.

___________

1. This is a good argument. The conclusion is the contrapositive of the premise. The premise is: “Ask favors ? refused.” The contrapositive is: “Never been refused ? Never asked a favor.”
2. This is a bad argument, but it’s a different error. The problem here is that we have no guarantee that the future will be the same as the past.
3. It’s hard to say if this is a good argument. There’s no proof that using a computer in a different way might work to improve writing skills.
4. This has two differences. First, positive references are shown to be necessary conditions for a good job. We were never told what was necessary for an ad to work.
    
   Second, the stimulus never says that the more emotional the appeal, the better the advertisement will work. It’s all or nothing, while this argument presents degrees of job success.
5. CORRECT. This repeats the flaw. Maybe reading directions will never teach you to program a computer, whether or not they’re well written.

Recap: The question begins with “Using rational argument in advertisements does not persuade people”. It is a Flawed Parallel Reasoning question. Learn how to master LSAT Flawed Parallel questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.