Can someone please explain this better please and why it can't be the wrong answer....
P: Marketing campaigns warning young people of the dangers of smoking and encouraging these people to quit have increased in frequency over the last 30 years.
WRONG ANSWER= (A): (Some marketing campaigns have been used to effectively deter certain activities.)
CORRECT ANSWER= (A): Marketing campaigns pointing out the dangers of an activity are effective deterrents.
C: Some marketing campaigns that have increased in frequency over the last three decades are effective deterrents.
LSAT Forum
2 postsPage 1 of 1
-
- courtney.kinsman
-
Thanks Received: 0
-
Vinny Gambini
- Posts: 1
- Joined: June 23rd, 2011
-
- noah
-
Thanks Received: 1192
-
Atticus Finch
- Posts: 1541
- Joined: February 11th, 2009
- This post thanked 1 time.
Re: question 3003
Sure!
The first (incorrect) assumption leaves open the possibility that all the campaigns about smoking were ineffective. Perhaps that faulty assumption is referring to campaigns against drunk driving. Those were effective, but, the ones against smoking were not.
And, if the ones against drunk driving have been shown at a consistent frequency, then how could we draw the conclusion?
The correct conclusion tells us that all deterrent campaigns pointing out dangers are effective, so we know that the smoking ones were, making the argument valid.
BTW, I heard that the only effective anti-smoking campaigns for teens are those that frame smoking as falling into the marketing trap set by corporate folks. Teens apparently don't care about the health risks since they are immortal.
The first (incorrect) assumption leaves open the possibility that all the campaigns about smoking were ineffective. Perhaps that faulty assumption is referring to campaigns against drunk driving. Those were effective, but, the ones against smoking were not.
And, if the ones against drunk driving have been shown at a consistent frequency, then how could we draw the conclusion?
The correct conclusion tells us that all deterrent campaigns pointing out dangers are effective, so we know that the smoking ones were, making the argument valid.
BTW, I heard that the only effective anti-smoking campaigns for teens are those that frame smoking as falling into the marketing trap set by corporate folks. Teens apparently don't care about the health risks since they are immortal.
2 posts Page 1 of 1