PT1.S4.Q24 - Contemporary Advertising

TheCourtJester

What is the flaw in this question? For those of you who are familiar with the Loophole, what is the loophole for the argument here?

Thanks!

McBeck418

I guess you’re looking for a flaw because you’re trying to CLIR, not because of the question type?

This looks valid to me. All contemporary advertising tries to persuade C——>P.

Only a small portion of contemporary advertising can be considered morally reprehensible. C <—s—>MR.

Therefore some attempts at persuasion can be morally reprehensible. P <—s—>MR.

Help2222

I think the loophole, or gap, is comparing all and some. "Although all contemporary advertising tries to persuade, only a small portion of contemporary advertising can be considered morally reprehensible. It nevertheless follows that some attempts at persuasion can be regarded as morally reprehensible." This is paralleled in answer choice C: "A good manager always makes important decisions on the basis of adequate data, although of course some managers fail to do this. It follows that some managers are not good managers."
Thanks!

McBeck418

I just want to clarify here that the correct answer choice is E, not C.

E states, All sonnets (S) are short poems(SP). S—>SP

Some sonnets are characterised by pluralism (P)
S <—some—> P

Therefore, some short poems are thematically pluralistic SP <—s—> P.

This copies the logical form in the stimulus.

C isn’t correct because the form is different.

Good managers (GM) always make informed decisions on adequate data (IDAD) GM—>IDAD.

Mangers (in general), some of them do not do this.
M<—s—>/IDAD.

Therefore Some managers are not good managers.
M<—S—>./GM.

This doesn’t reflect the logic in the stimulus.

Sailor Moon LSAT

@McBeck418 can you expand more on how the logic for C doesn't reflect the stimulus? Is it that you need to negate something before you get the some all relationship? Other than that it seems good to me and since there isn't a JY video I just want to make sure I understand.

McBeck418

Hey, I'll try my best. I'm not really sure what you're looking to negate, but if you want to elaborate a little bit, we can talk about how it fits into this question.

Since this is a parallel method of reasoning question, we want our answer choice to match exactly the form that is provided to us in the stimulus. The stimulus provides the form

A--->B
A<--some--> C

---

B <---some--> C

All contemporary advertising always tries to persuade (A---->B)
Only a small portion of contemporary advertising can be considered morally reprehensible (A <--some--> C)

Therefore, some attempts at persuasion can be regarded as morally reprehensible (B <--some--> C.

Now, answer choice C just doesn't give us the same type of relationship. It gives us this:

A----->B
C<--some-->/B

---

C<--some-->/A

A good manager always makes important decisions based on data (A--->B)

Some managers (it does not say good managers, so I can't assume they're talking about the same subject) don't do this (i.e. make important decisions based on data) C<--some-->/B

Therefore, some managers are not good managers C<--some-->/A.

While the conclusion is a some statement, it does not represent the same relationship as the original stimulus does. The stimulus presents us a with a valid argument form. JY talks about it in his some/most lessons. Answer choice C does not present us with the same valid argument form and therefore, it cannot be parallel.

The correct answer choice is tricky/hidden, because it lays out its logic in a less intuitive/natural way. Instead of leading with premises and then the conclusion like the stimulus does, it begins with its conclusion and it provides its some premise first. But when its broken down, we can see that it does clearly reflect the logical form provided in the stimulus.

A-->B

A<--some-->C

B<--some-->C

All sonnets are short poems (A-->B)
Some sonnets are characterised by pluralism (A <--some--> C)
Some short poems are thematically pluralistic (B<--some-->C).

Hopefully this helps clear up some confusion about why C is wrong. JY's videos on some/most statements are a good resource for understanding the underlying logical framework here.

*sorry if there is weird formatting issues. I tried to fix them, but I'm not sure it worked exactly.