Q15 - Often, a product popularly believed

[tamwaiman]

I hesitated about (A) and (D).
Can someone please tell me why (A) is incorrect?
Thanks.

[aileenann]

One reason (A) is not the answer is that it is structured differently from the original argument. For one thing, (A) has a flaw we don't see in the original. That flaw is a mismatch between the premises and the conclusion.

In particular, (A) says that choosing a job is all about comparing disagreeable qualities. Then as a conclusion (A) brings in not only disagreeable qualities but also agreeable ones. That is, the conclusion is really about a balance of good and bad, whereas the premise is only about comparing bad. This logical gap means we've got a flaw in our argument in (A). However, I don't see this same flaw in the original argument so that shows they don't match up.

Does that make sense?

[interestedintacos]

The structure of the stimulus goes as follows:

Quality (i.e. thinking a product is the best of its type) is often confused with reputation, which provides its owner with status. Thus while it's ok for a person to pay for a product to get status, one shouldn't do so without the knowledge that he is in fact buying it for status and not necessarily quality.

Parallel: Personal charm is often confused with virtue. Thus while it's ok to befriend a person for his charm, one shouldn't do so without the knowledge that he's befriending based on charm and not necessarily virtue.

A is often confused with B. Thus if one is going to do C (befriending/buying) based on A he ought to realize it's based on A and not be confused into thinking it's based on B.

Answer choice A, while somewhat appealing on a superficial level, doesn't really match up with the stimulus at all. We don't get an A and B "often confused" with each other. We get "often" one thing is a matter of doing another thing. The two things aren't being confused for one another. To match up it would have to read like this:

"Often a job's desirable location is confused with having good hours. So while it's ok to personally value a desirable location and choose a job based on that, one ought to realize he is choosing based on desirable location and not necessarily good hours."

The conclusion, as you can see, could be parallel to the stimulus, but we would need to change the premise so that we have 2 things being confused with one another.

[nlynes]

What about C and D. I know that D is right but why is D right and C wrong?

Thanks

[demetri.blaisdell]

nlynes,

When we're matching arguments, it's helpful to match parts of the argument to avoid having to do the "heavy lifting" of reasoning through each answer choice.

The conclusion of the stimulus is "there's no problem with basing your decision on prestige but don't think you're getting quality."

(C)'s conclusion is "there's no problem with learning quickly, but you are more likely to learn faster if you learn to enjoy it." It doesn't have the "don't think you are" part but rather says you will do better if you do it a different way.

(D)'s conclusion is "there's no problem with befriending a charming person, but don't think you're getting a good and loyal friend." This one is Cindarella with the glass slipper. A perfect fit. Note that it doesn't tell you to do things differently (it's more like a disclaimer---"don't say I didn't tell you").

I hope this helps. Let me know if you have any more questions.

Demetri

[cdjmarmon]

I got rid of D becaase it says "not necessarily" while the argument is more definite and does not contain any gaps.

How is "not necessarily" equal to "not"?

[timmydoeslsat]

The stimulus is telling us that a product often believed to be the best type is not necessarily that. Rather that believed product = status.

So if you want status, no harm...but you should know that you are not necessarily getting the best type.

Answer choice D is saying the same thing. Two things are not necessarily the same. So a conclusion of caution is made.

[slimjimsquinn]

My problem with D) is between the mismatch of "virtue" and "good, loyal friend." You can be a virtuous person who gives to charity but can be a terrible friend.

Does the original argument have a mismatch like this too? I assumed "prestige" measured up to "reputation" pretty well.

Help, please! This question has me confuzzled.

[ShariS937]

If the above explanations work for you - ignore this one. If you're super, super stuck (or have a humanities background) this may help.

Here's how I read the stimulus:
- If you buy for reputation, and assume (ie, make an unconscious judgment) that reputation means only quality (when it may mean only popular), then you should become conscious to the fact that you are buying for popularity (status/prestige) instead of quality. Which is fine, just recognize that your assumption may lead you down a different path than you are expecting.

- Boiled way down, it says: don't judge a book by its cover (then more stuff that will take time to parse, so leave it until after the 1st pass).

1st pass elimination:
- A and D are the only possible choices that fit don't judge a book by its cover.

2nd pass:
- A says: When you compare features to determine the best choice blah blah
You could stop here; in this scenario, a comparison of features is going on. That is the opposite of assuming. Eliminate.

- D says: People judge books (friends) by covers (charm). That's fine, just consciously recognize that charm and virtue are not identical things.
Then the test makers lose me bc as the other poster points out, virtue, goodness, and loyalty are highly subjective categories that differ a lot from culture to culture. But, since D is the last choice standing, and it's closely aligned in every other way to the stimulus - I have to give the test makers a pass and say D is correct.

If I have enough time for a 3rd round of self-debate, I'd look at the stimulus this way:
- Status does not equal quality; it can in fact equal not quality
- Charm does not equal virtue; it can in fact equal not virtue (ie not good and not loyal)
It looks like they're just shooting for a neutral replacement of the word "virtue" in order to add complexity to an answer that is otherwise perfectly straightforward. Which is super LSAT of them!

Basically, I think the stimulus and choice D structures align perfectly, provided the test maker doesn't recognize their potential unconscious cultural bias (which is hilarious, ish, and also is exactly how bias works, so...)

The MP method is a good way to compensate for the test's biases, which are in every single standardized test and which are observable throughout this one, too. Nature of the beast. It probably just means the test makers are having a dialectic with the test prep industry (ie, making the test harder as earlier years' stratagems become obsolete) more than with the universities, who are using the test as an instrument to measure aptitude.

Spotting known traps is the best way to stay oriented to the test makers' logic; working wrong to right is a solid method.

Cheers,
s