Self-study
Consumer advocate: Under the current absence of government standards for food product labeling, manufacturers are misleading or deceiving consumers by their product labeling. ███ ████████ █ ███████ █████ ██ █████ ██ ███████ ████████ ██████ █████████ ███ ███ ███████ ██ ████ ████ ██████ ████████████ ███ ██████ ██████████ █████ ███████████ ██ ███████ ██ ████ ████████ ██ ████████ ██████████ ██ ████ ████ ███ ████████████ ████████ ████ ██████ █████ ███████████ ██ ██████████████ ██████████
█████████████ █████ █████ ████████ ███████████ ████ ████ ███ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ██████████ █████ ████ ███████████ ███ ████ ████ █████ ███████ ██ ██████ ██ ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████ ████ █████████ ████ ████ ███ ████ ██████████ ███████████ ████ ███ ██████████ ████ █████ █████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ █████████ ██ ████ █████████ ██████ ████ █████
Point At Issue: Disagree
We treat Point At Issue questions like double-MSS. In this disagree question, the correct answer needs to receive positive support (✅) from one speaker and negative support (❌) from the other. Mere silence on the issue (❓) doesn’t cut it.
In this particular stimulus, I’d say anticipating the issue up front is medium difficulty. Here’s a distilled breakdown, highlighting the area of disagreement:
Consumer Advocate
Premise: The OJ uses “fresh” differently from how the word is commonly understood.
________
Conclusion: Labeling the OJ “fresh” is deceptive.
Manufacturer
Using words differently from how they are commonly understood is not deceptive.
The manufacturer disagrees with the consumer advocate’s reasoning – the link between the advocate’s premise and conclusion.
16.
Which one of the following ███████████ ██ ████████████ █████ ██████████ ████ ██ █ ███████ ██ ███ ████████████████ ████████ ███████ ████ ██ ███ ████████ █████████
a
In the absence ██ ██████████ ███████████ ███ █████ ████ ██ ███████ █████████ ██████ █████████ ██ █████████████ █████ ██████ ██████
(A) is best understood as an invitation to defend the wrong viewpoint – it’s a great defense of the advocate’s position against that of the manufacturer.
If common standards of understanding should determine whether labeling is deceptive, then the manufacturer’s argument fails – the use of “fresh” doesn’t match common understanding, and is therefore deceptive.
b
Government standards for ████████ ████████ ██████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ███████ ██████ █████████ ██ ██████████████
Irrelevant – the manufacturer’s point is whatever those standards are, they’ll happily comply.
c
People should be █████ ██ ███ ██████ ████ ██ ██ █████ ██ ██ ███ ██ ███████ ██ █████ ██████████ ███ ████████ █████████ ███ █████████ ██ █████████
This aligns with and justifies the manufacturer’s behavior. There are no current standards governing food labeling, so it is currently legal for manufacturers to use the word “fresh” in sketchy ways. (C) says if it’s legal, people should be free to do it.
d
When government standards ███ ██████ █████████ ███ ████████ ████████ ███ ████████████ ████ ████ ██████ ███ ██████████ █████████ ██████ ██████ ████ ███████████
There are no government standards currently in place, so this can’t provide positive support for the manufacturer’s position that using words differently from how they are commonly understood isn’t deceptive. (D) would be correct if existing government standards backed up the manufacturer’s labeling.
e
In their interpretation ██ █████████ █████████ ██████ █████ ███████ ████ █████████ █████████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ██ █████████████ ██████ █████ █████████████ █████ ████ █████ ████████ ████ ██████████ ██████████
A lot of things wrong here. (E) makes a big deal out of whether consumers think manufacturers intended to deceive, but neither of those things matters. No one cares what consumers think, and the point of contention between the advocate and the manufacturer is whether the labeling is deceptive in fact, not whether that deception was intentional.
The whole “reap large benefits” business comes in out of nowhere, too.