Using rational argument in advertisements does not persuade people to buy the products being advertised. Therefore, ...
Julie-VAugust 8, 2019
(D)
Hi LSAT Max,
Can someone explain why (D) would be the incorrect answer?
Also, is there a typo in the answer choice? The first sentence for (D) reads "A person who does to have positive letters of references cannot get a good job".
Thanks for the help!
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Good catch! There is a typo, it should say "the person who does not have positive letters..". This is a flawed parallel reasoning question, so let's start by identifying the flaw in the stimulus.
Using rational argument in ads does not persuade people to buy the products being advertised.
RA -> ~PP PP - > ~RA
Therefore, advertisers who replace the rational argument with non-rational appeals to emotion will persuade people to buy the products being advertised.
~RA -> PP
This is a mistaken reversal.
Now let's compare it to (D).
A person who does not have positive letters of reference cannot get a good job.
~ PL -> ~GJ
Therefore, the better the letters, the better the job.
BL -> BJ
The problem with the argument the premise and the conclusion are talking about entirely different concepts. We cannot equate a good job with a better job, that is a comparative term. Is it possible that a job is better than the other but is not a good job? Is it possible that a job is good but not better than another? Sure. Thus, the argument commits a different kind of logical fallacy compared to the stimulus.
Does this make sense? Let me know if you have any further questions.
