The only way that bookstores can profitably sell books at below-market prices is to get the books at a discount from publishers. ██████ ██████████ ████████ █ ████ █████ ███████ ████████ ████ ██████ ███ █████████ ████ ███████████ ██ ████████ ████ ███████ ██████████ ████ ██████ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ████ █████████ ██████ ██ █ █████ ███████████ ███████ ████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ██ █████
When a question stem is at all unique, pay special attention to that unique element – wrong answer choices will often take advantage of people who forget about it.
This stem is unique in two ways: it’s a must be false question, and the stem itself tacks on an additional premise. Want some big brain anticipations?
One or more of the wrong answer choices will be bait for people who think this is a must be true question, and the correct answer choice will use the stem’s additional premise.
If thinking about this question in English was challenging, consider more practice to gain fluency in formal logic. Here’s the argument presented in both languages:
English
- If a bookstore is profitably selling below-market books, they have a discount from publishers*
- If they have a discount, they’re selling at high volume**
- If they’re selling at high volume, they
either cater to the masses orhave exclusive access.***
Logic
- Profits → Discount*
- Discount → Volume**
- Volume →
Cater orExclusive***
*The only is a sufficient condition indicator.
**We’re diagramming unless here in the form that’s most convenient for the argument’s flow.
***That strikethrough comes from the stem. The bookstore doesn’t cater to the masses, so for our purposes selling at volume requires exclusive access.
These claims form a big ol’ conditional chain, which is nice to view in both directions:
Default: Profits → Discount → Volume → Exclusive
Contrapositive: /Exclusive → /Volume → /Discount → /Profits
Remembering this is a must be false question, the answer choice will give a counterexample to these rules. That is, it will affirm one of these sufficient conditions and negate a necessary condition. The testwriters like using the whole conditional chain, so let’s anticipate:
Logic: BookstoreProfits and Bookstore/Exclusive
English: The bookstore profitably sells books below-market even though it doesn’t have exclusive access.
Other stuff could work, though. We could say (Discount and /Exclusive) or (Volume and /Exclusive) or (Profits and /Volume) or (Discount and /Volume). Anything that says “yes” to one condition and then says “no” to one of the conditions on its right.
Analysis by MichaelWright
If all the statements in ███ ███████ ███ ████ ███ ██ ██ ██ ████ ████ ████ █ █████████ ████ ███ █████ ██ ████ ███████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██████ ██ █████
The bookstore profitably █████ ████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ████████████ ███████
The bookstore does ███ ██████████ ████ ███ ██ ███ █████ ██ ████████████ ███████
Either the bookstore ███ █████████ ██████ ██ █ █████ ███████████ ██████ ██ ████ ██ ████ ███ ███ █ ████████ ████ ███ ███████████
The bookstore does ███ ████ █████████ ██████ ██ █ █████ ███████████ ██████ ███ ██████████ █████ ████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ████████████ ███████
The bookstore does ███ ████ █████████ ██████ ██ █ █████ ███████████ ███████ ███ ████ ██ ███ █ ████████ ████ ███ ███████████