Self-study
Conclusion Humorous television advertisements are the only effective ones. ███ ██ █████████ ██ ████████ ██ ████ ███ ████ ███████ ████████ ██████████ ██ ████ ████ █████ █████████ ████ ██████ ███ █ ███████ ██ ██ █████████ ████ ██████████ ███ ██ █████████████ ██ ██ █████████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ ████████
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that humorous ads are the only effective ones. He supports this with the following premises:
(1) If something is humorous, it will attract people’s attention and allow a message to be conveyed.
(2) If an ad is effective, it must convey its message.
Identify and Describe Flaw
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of confusing necessary and sufficient conditions. We know effective ads convey a message (and so they also can convey a message) but the author then assumes that they must be humorous. In other words, he treats “humorous” as necessary for “can convey” when it’s really only sufficient.
He argues that if an ad is effective, it must be humorous, since humorous ads can convey a message. But what if other ads, like emotional ads, can also convey a message? In that case, humorous ads might not be the only effective ones.
3.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ █ ████ ██ ███ █████████
a
It takes for ███████ ████ ███████ ███ █████ ███ ███████ █ ████████ █████████ ███ ████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ █ ███████ ██ ██ █████████
The author treats “humorous” as necessary for “can convey,” when it’s really only sufficient. He assumes that only humor can convey a message. But if scary or sad ads can also hold attention long enough to convey a message, then funny ads might not be the only effective ones.
b
It confuses attracting █ ████████ █████████ ████ ███████ █ ████████ █████████ ████ ██████ ███ █ ███████ ██ ██ █████████
The author actually distinguishes between these ideas by saying that if something is humorous it will not only attract attention but it will also hold attention long enough for a message to be conveyed.
c
It treats a █████████ █████████ ███ ██ ███████████████ █████ █████████ ██ ██ ██ ████ █ ██████████ ██████████
The author treats a sufficient condition for “can convey” as if it were a necessary condition. His conclusion isn’t about what is sufficient for an ad’s being effective; it’s about what is necessary for an ad’s being effective.
d
It uses two ██████ ██ ███ ████ ███████████ ███████ ███████████████ █████
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of equivocation, where the argument uses the same term in different ways. The author doesn't make this mistake; he uses “effective” clearly and consistently throughout his argument.
e
It takes for ███████ ████ ██ ███████████████ ████ ███████ ██ ██ ██████ ███ ████████
The author doesn’t assume this. In fact, he doesn’t make any claims about the purpose of ads at all. Instead, he assumes that humorous ads are the only effective ones, without considering that other kinds of ads might also be able to convey a message and be effective.