Q16 - Sales manager: The highest priority

[kmewmewblue]

I chose (B).
Could anyone help me that why (D) is the answer and no (B)?
Thanks.

[timmydoeslsat]

Let us first identify the sales manager's argument.

Highest priority should be given to the needs of the sales department.

Why?

Because if the company doesn't have successful sales, the company will fail.

Do you a problem with his argument before we even look at the argument of the shipping manager?

The sales manager is saying what should be done without giving justification for this prescriptive language.

Just because something is necessary to the company, does that mean they should be given HIGHEST priority? No!

The sales manager is assuming that if something is a necessary part of the company, that it SHOULD be given HIGHEST priority.

Notice the language of highest. That means it is above all else. You cannot have two things given HIGHEST priority. Two things could have high priority, but both cannot be highest.

The shipping manager simply points out that there are other departments that are necessary for the company to succeed. Since that is the case, the shipping manager, states that it is not possible to give HIGHEST priority to all of those departments that are necessary.

The shipping manager shows how absurd it is that the highest priority should be given just because something is necessary.

Answer choice B states that the argument uses the term "highest priority" ambiguously. That term does not change meaning, nor is its meaning hidden in this argument.

[geverett]

Chose D during the timed PT. Chose A on my untimed review.

Is A wrong b/c critical is not synonymous with necessary? I thought it could be said to be so in the context of the answer choice.

Also, what is the absurd consequence cited in D? Is it the fact that many other departments are necessary, and you cannot give them all the highest priority?

Not sure how this equates to a consequence. Thoughts?

[LSAT-Chang]

Is A wrong b/c critical is not synonymous with necessary? I thought it could be said to be so in the context of the answer choice.

I think A is wrong because the shipping manager never claims that the sales department taken by itself is NOT critical to the company's success as a whole. He could believe that the sales department IS critical to the company's success, but his point is that there are OTHER departments as well ASIDE from sales department that are also crucial to the company's success and thus we can't give the highest priority to ALL of them. At least this was the reason why I eliminated this one!

Also, what is the absurd consequence cited in D? Is it the fact that many other departments are necessary, and you cannot give them all the highest priority?

Not sure how this equates to a consequence. Thoughts?

Yeah you are exactly right. The absurd consequence is the fact about giving the highest priority to all of them. I think this equates to a consequence perfectly since if we take the sales manager's assumption to be that a department's necessity earns it the highest priority, then the consequence that results from this is that all departments should earn highest priority which is "absurd".

Did I make any sense?

[maryadkins]

Awesome explanations here. Is everyone clear now on what's wrong with (A) and (B)? I think the reasons given already in the discussion are spot on, but let me know if anything remains unclear to anybody...

[cwolfington]

I chose A) because the sales manager uses the phrase "would fail", and the shipping manager uses the phrase "to succeed". I interpreted "to succeed" as meaning "to flourish", but it really means "to not fail"

[roflcoptersoisoi]

Sales manager:
Premise: Without successful sales, the company as a whole would fail.
Conclusion: Highest priority should be given to needs of sales department.

Assumption: Presumes if the department is necessary to the company's survival, then it must be given that it must be given highest priority. Perhaps there are other departments such as the shipping department that are necessary to the company's survival.

Shipping manager:
Premise: There are several departments other than sales that are also necessary to the company's success/survival.
Conclusion: It is impossible to give highest priority to all departments that are.


(A) This is tempting if you misinterpret's the shipping manager's response as being that the sales department is necessary insofar as it is jointly necessary with the other departments. However, the shipping manager is not refuting the sales manager's claim that the sales department is necessary to the company's success, he concedes this point and says that in addition to the sales department, there are other departments that are also independently necessary to the company's success.
(B) There is no such ambiguity in regards to "highest priority", the meaning is explicit and used the same way by both and the shipping manager does not point it out.
(C) The shipping manager makes no such claim, he just says there are other departments are are also essential to the company's success, he does not discusses how important they are relative to the sales department.
(D) Correct. the shipping manager addresses the assumption made by the the sales manager, that if something is vital to the survival of something, it must be given the highest priority. The shipping manager then says that if took the sales manager's presupposition as true then we'd have to give the highest priority to several departments because there are many other departments that are also necessary to the company's success. And as he rightly points out, giving highest priority to numerous things is not possible.
(E) The author does not over extrapolate from an aberration. While this is a flawed way of arguing, the sales manager does not commit this error in reasoning nor does the shipping manager point it out.