PT60.S3.Q24 - Music critic: How well an underground rock group's

youbbyun

so i think this PSA Lr question hinges on whether you correctly understand the conclusion.

Can someone explain to me how

"how well an underground rock groups recordings sell is no mark of that group's success as an underground group" (what the stimulus says)

means the same as

"how well an underground rock groups recording sell is UNSUCCESSFUL?"

how does have something not have a mark on success mean it's unsuccessful? can't it just be irrelevant?

I'm really confused here- thank you!

Admin note: edited title
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-60-section-3-question-24/

Bumblebee

Hey!
This question gave me a headache.

"how well an underground rock groups recordings sell is no mark of that group's success as an underground group" does not mean the same as
"how well an underground rock groups recording sell is UNSUCCESSFUL"

The relationship is more like, "if something is unsuccessful--> it is no mark of success". Sorry that doesn't make sense grammatically, but the gist is that the first idea "unsuccessful" implies the second idea "no mark of success", not the other way around. In a similar way, "miserable" implies "not happy".

I think a good way to check whether a principle almost justifies the conclusion is to plug it into the argument.

The form of this argument is more complex than usual due to the softness of the words like "may be because...", but it resembles a common argument form:

A-->B

Therefore A-->D

To justify this conclusion, you need to add B-->D.

This is what the correct AC does to the argument.

A (selling well or poorly) -->may be because of B (too trendy or incompetent)

Therefore A (selling well or poorly)--> D (no mark of success)

To help justify the conclusion, you need to connect B and D.

The correct principle connects B and D almost sufficiently, because "unsuccessful" implies "no mark of success". This is a pseudo sufficient assumption so the gap isn't completely closed, but the it comes quite close!

Hope this made sense!

Edit:

Just wanted to add that the correct AC to PSA or SA questions doesn't have to have exactly the same degree of strength as the conclusion, but it has to be strong enough to almost guarantee (in PSA) or guarantee (in SA) the conclusion.