#18 - Teacher: Journalists who conceal the identity of the

[kmcke01]

Hello,

I got the Strenthener question in an isolated set of drills so did not see the other.

I picked answer choice D. I chose this because I was trying to patch the flaw the other speaker pointed out in the argument. I believe I realized why D was wrong and A was right, but wanted to make sure my explanation tracks:

The teacher makes an argument. His conclusion is "Journalists who conceal the identity of the sources they quote stake their professional reputations on what may be called the logic of anecdotes." He then lists his premises.

The student then refutes the argument by countering that if what the journalist says is true, it would mean that a journalist would not have to bother with sources at all.
Is the student mischaracterizing the teacher's argument as the teacher is not arguing for what is right or wrong, but instead just identifying a phenomenon?

So D is not a reasonable answer as it does not actually address a flaw in the argument, just addresses the student's refute (which is misinterpreting the argument in the first place.) Does the student's response as a whole just serve as a red herring to confuse test takers as only the teacher's argument is what is important to the question?

[Dana D]

Hey there,

The student's response is not irrelevant - the teacher says publications are only accepted if they are highly plausible, original, or interesting. The student counters and says why bother with sources then - just make up your own stories. Answer choice (A) shows that the journalists must stake their reputation on anecdotes from sources because without them, journalists are forced to undermine their professional standing and have statements be rejected for being Implausible, unoriginal, or dull. Sources are necessary to the journalists, and thus answer choice (A) weakens the teacher's argument against the student.

[lsatstudent99966]

Is (C) also incorrect because it is actually off-topic for the following reasons:

The teacher only says that to be accepted for publication, the anonymous quote must be original OR plausible OR interesting to the audience. She doesn't say that it has to be all three.

Thus, it doesn't seem relevant to the stimulus at all whether a highly original statement would seem implausible (and whether the reporter's good reputation would make a difference).

Thank you!

[Amber Thomas]

Hi LSATStudent99966!

You're right, the teacher makes no mention of whether or not a journalist needs to already be known for solid and reliable work. You're also right that the statements need be only ONE of the criteria (plausible, interest, or originality), not all three. So, even if the anecdote is implausible, it is still valid if it is highly original, according to our teacher.

I hope this helps!