Q12 - Several movie critics have claimed

[mshinners]

Question Type:
ID the Flaw

Stimulus Breakdown:
Critics reached a conclusion based on flawed data. Therefore, they are wrong.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument is a prime example of the Unproven vs. Untrue flaw. A group reached a conclusion, but their argument for it was faulty (here, based on bad survey data). From this, the author concludes not that they might be wrong (which would be valid), but that they are wrong. If you didn't spot this as Unproven vs. Untrue, it's definitely time to review the classic flaws!

Correct answer:
(A)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Bingo. This is the Unproven vs. Untrue answer. It infers the critics' claim is false because the only evidence given for it (the survey data) is unsatisfactory.

(B) Wrong flaw (Comparison). This answer would be correct in an argument that compared the damage done by false vs. true but negative claims (or an argument that ignored one while calling the other the biggest threat).

(C) Wrong flaw (Sampling). Cheeky, LSAT! The bad sample is what the movie critics rely on. This answer would be correct in a question asking about the flaw in their argument, but this one asks about the flaw in the author's argument.

(D) Wrong flaw (Ad hominem). While the data used by the critics is questioned, their character isn't.

(E) Tempting. This is a flavor of Unproven vs. Untrue, but it runs in the opposite direction of the argument, which treats bad evidence as invalidating a conclusion. This answer would apply if the author stated that the movie didn't cause socially irresponsible actions, so the sample must therefore have been wrong (in other words, the premise and conclusion would need to be swapped).

Takeaway/Pattern:
Hit those classic flaws! If you haven't already, download our flashcards from the Student Center.

#officialexplanation