Self-paced
A salesperson who makes a sale does not change the desires of the customer. ███████ ███ ███████████ █████ ███ ████ █████ ███████ ███ ███ ████ █████████ ███ ████████ ████ █ ██████████ ███████ ████ ███████ █████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████ ███ █ ██████████ ██ ████ ████ ███ █████████ ███████████ ██ ███ █████████████ ██████████ █████ ███████████ ████ ████████ ███ ███████████ █████ █████ ████ ██ ███ ██ ██████ ███ █████ ██ ████████
Summary
The author tries to draw an analogy between convincing people to vote for a politician and how a salesperson convinces people to buy a products. A salesperson doesn’t change the person’s desires, but rather convinces the person that a product will satisfy the person’s existing desires. Since convincing people to vote for a politician is analogous, after finding out what policies a person supports, one should try to convince the person that a particular politician is most likely to get those policies enacted.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
We’re looking to complete the analogy. The missing piece is the idea that one tries to convince a person that a particular politician is most likely to get the person’s preferred policies enacted.
20.
Which one of the following ████ █████████ █████████ ███ █████████
a
show that the █████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ██ █████ ████████
Unsupported. The saleperson analogy doesn’t involve pointing out the shortcomings of competing products. So a conclusion concerning the shortcomings of other politicians doesn’t fit.
b
disguise any difference ███████ ███ ████████ ███ ██████████ ████████ ███ ███ ████████ █████████ ██ █████ ██████████
Unsupported. The salesperson analogy doesn’t involve making people think one product is similar to others. It’s about convincing someone that a particular product will do what the customer wants.
c
convince the voter ████ ███ ████████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ ███ █████
Antisupported. The salesperson analogy involves finding out what the customer desires, not trying to change those desires. So the conclusion would not involve trying to change what policies a person prefers.
d
demonstrate that the ██████████ ██ █ ██████ ██ ███████████ █████████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ███ █████
Unsupported. The conclusion should be about showing that a politician will get a person’s preferred policies enacted. The character and interests of a politician are not the same as the policies that politician will get enacted.
e
persuade the voter ████ ██████ ███ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ████ ███ ██ ███ █████ ████████ ███████
Strongly supported. The salesperson analogy involves getting a person to think a product will satisfy the person’s desires. So, the conclusion should be about getting a person to think a politicians will get the person’s preferred policies enacted.