The conclusion of the argument is: "Thus, although it is clear that the publisher knowingly made a false claim, doing so should not be considered unethical in this case." Why? The publisher claimed that the self-help book showed readers how to become exceptionally successful. However, everyone knows that no book can deliver to the many what, by definition, must remain limited to the few: exceptional success.
Answer choice (D) states: Knowingly making a false claim is unethical only if there is a possibility that someone will act as if the claim might be true. This is diagrammed:
PSACT = possibility that someone will act as if the claim might be true
U ==> PSACT Not PSACT ==> not U
So the contrapositive states: if there is no possibility that someone will act as if the claim might be true, then knowingly making a false claim is not unethical.
The stimulus gives us no information on whether one will act as if the claim might be true. We merely know that everyone knows no book can deliver exceptional success to many because by definition it must remain limited to the few. However, we do not know if anyone will act as if the publisher's claim might be true.
Answer choice (A) is correct because it strongly supports the reasoning of the stimulus. Answer choice (A) diagrammed out is:
"Knowingly making a false claim is unethical only if it is reasonable for people to accept the claim as true."
RACT = reasonable for people to accept the claim as true
U ==> RACT Not RACT ==> not U
The contrapositive of answer choice (A) strongly supports the stimulus. The stimulus tells us that everyone knows that no book can deliver exceptional success to many. So, it is not reasonable for people to accept the claims of the publisher as true. Thus, following the contrapositive of answer choice (A), it is, therefore, not unethical for the publishers to knowingly make the false claim.
Hope that was helpful! Let us know if you have any other questions!
