Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 66 - Section 2 - Question 17

August 17, 2012

4 comments

Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 136 - Section 2 - Question 17

August 17, 2012

Ditalgame Corporation’s computer video games are subject to widespread illegal copying. To combat this piracy, Ditalgame will begin using a new copy protection feature on its games. Ditalgame’s president predicts a substantial increase in sales of the company’s games once the new copy protection feature is implemented.

Summarize Argument

The president concludes that Ditalgame’s sales will increase significantly once the new copy protection feature is added. This is because Ditalgame's games are frequently pirated, so they are implementing a new feature to help prevent piracy.

Notable Assumptions

The president assumes that the feature will directly boost sales without explaining how. He assumes piracy significantly affects sales, rather than other factors like poor game quality. He also seems to assume that some pirates will buy Ditalgame’s games when piracy is no longer an option, rather than choosing other games to pirate or buy.

A
Ditalgame has spent millions of dollars developing the new copy protection feature, and the company can recoup these costs only if its sales increase substantially.

This suggests that Ditalgame needs more sales in order to make an overall profit. But the president’s conclusion is only about whether Ditalgame will increase its sales. (A) fails to address the connection between reduced piracy and increased sales.

B
Over the last several years, the market for computer games has grown steadily, but Ditalgame’s share of that market has shrunk considerably.

The fact that Ditalgame’s share of the game market has shrunk doesn’t tell us whether the copy protection feature will increase sales. (B) fails to address the connection between reduced piracy and increased sales.

C
The copy protection feature causes a copied game to be playable just long enough for most people to come to enjoy it so much that they decide they have to have it.

This provides one explanation for how the copy protection feature could cause a significant increase in sales: by leading some pirates to buy the game.

D
Game Review Monthly, the most commonly read magazine among people who frequently copy computer games, generally gives favorable reviews to Ditalgame games.

This might help explain why Ditalgame’s games are subject to widespread illegal copying, but it doesn’t help explain how the new copy protection feature will increase sales. (D) fails to address the connection between reduced piracy and increased sales.

E
Computer games produced by Ditalgame are copied more frequently than computer games produced by Ditalgame’s main competitors.

We already know that Ditalgame’s games “are subject to widespread illegal copying.” It doesn’t matter if they’re copied more than their competitors’ games. (E) fails to address the connection between reduced piracy and increased sales.


6 comments

Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 26 - Section 2 - Question 17

August 16, 2012

41 comments

Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 103 - Section 2 - Question 17

August 16, 2012

Commissioner: I have been incorrectly criticized for having made my decision on the power plant issue prematurely. I based my decision on the report prepared by the neighborhood association and, although I have not studied it thoroughly, I am sure that the information it contains is accurate. Moreover, you may recall that when I received input from the neighborhood association on jail relocation, I agreed with its recommendation.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The commissioner concludes that critics are incorrect to claim that a decision about a power plant was premature. Why? Because the decision was based on a neighborhood association report, which the commissioner is certain contains accurate information (even though the commissioner hasn’t read it closely). Also, the commissioner agreed with a previous recommendation from this association about a different issue.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The commissioner concludes that a decision was not premature, even though it was based on a single report which the commissioner hadn’t studied closely. This is supported only by a baseless assurance that the report is accurate, and a favorable view of a previous report on a different issue.

The overarching flaw is that the commissioner relies too much on a single, unverified report by an organization of unknown reliability.

A
It takes for granted that the association’s information is not distorted by bias.
The commissioner accepts the association’s report as the only necessary basis for a decision, but offers no assurance that the association is not biased.
B
It draws a conclusion about the recommendations of the association from incomplete recollections.
The commissioner does not appear to have an incomplete recollection of the association’s recommendation. Also, the conclusion is about whether the decision was hasty, not about the recommendation itself.
C
It takes for granted that the association’s report is the only direct evidence that needed to be considered.
The commissioner uses the association’s report as the only basis for a decision, without ever mentioning the possibility of considering other evidence or explaining why other evidence is not necessary.
D
It hastily concludes that the association’s report is accurate, without having studied it in detail.
The commissioner claims to be “sure” that the report is accurate, but admits to having not studied it in detail. However, without having studied the report in detail, the commissioner cannot really be sure of its accuracy.
E
It takes for granted that agreeing with the association’s past recommendation helps to justify agreeing with its current recommendation.
The commissioner uses an agreement with a past report to defend the use of the association’s current recommendation as the only basis for a decision. However, the past report does not guarantee the quality of the present recommendation.

50 comments

Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 26 - Section 3 - Question 17

August 16, 2012

39 comments

Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 103 - Section 3 - Question 17

August 16, 2012

42 comments

Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 28 - Section 3 - Question 17

August 8, 2012

2 comments

Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 106 - Section 3 - Question 17

August 8, 2012

In 1992, a major newspaper circulated throughout North America paid its reporters an average salary that was much lower than the average salary paid by its principal competitors to their reporters. An executive of the newspaper argued that this practice was justified, since any shortfall that might exist in the reporters’ salaries is fully compensated by the valuable training they receive through their assignments.

Summarize Argument
The newspaper executive concludes that the newspaper is justified in paying its reporters a far-below-average salary. Why? Because the lower pay is compensated by the training the reporters get on the job.

Notable Assumptions
The executive assumes that the training reporters receive while working for the newspaper in question is substantially higher in quality than the training they would receive at a higher-paying competitor. Otherwise, the training couldn’t justify the low salary.
The executive also assumes that the newspaper’s reporters are generally inexperienced enough to benefit from additional training, or that their pay increases after they gain experience.

A
Senior reporters at the newspaper earned as much as reporters of similar stature who worked for the newspaper’s principal competitors.
This does not weaken the argument. If anything, it strengthens by affirming the executive’s assumption that the pay shortfall is limited to reporters who benefit from additional training.
B
Most of the newspaper’s reporters had worked there for more than ten years.
This weakens the argument by indicating that most of the newspaper’s reporters do not benefit from additional training. That would mean they just get paid less without receiving any benefit in return—in other words, the pay gap would not be justified.
C
The circulation of the newspaper had recently reached a plateau, after it had increased steadily throughout the 1980s.
This does not weaken the argument. The circulation of the newspaper has nothing to do with whether or not the newspaper is justified in paying reporters less. Like (E), this claim is just irrelevant.
D
The union that represented reporters at the newspaper was different from the union that represented reporters at the newspaper’s competitors.
This does not weaken the argument. Having a different union has no bearing on whether the pay difference is justified: maybe the union is weak and failed to negotiate a good deal, or maybe getting more training is actually a great bargain for reporters. We just don’t know.
E
The newspaper was widely read throughout continental Europe and Great Britain as well as North America.
This does not weaken the argument—like (C), it’s just irrelevant. Where the newspapers readers are located has nothing to do with the executive’s argument about lower pay for reporters being justified.

102 comments

Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 29 - Section 1 - Question 17

August 7, 2012

27 comments

Sign up to star your favorites LSAT 107 - Section 1 - Question 17

August 7, 2012

32 comments

«‹17181920212223242526272829303132333435›»