#6 - Advertisement: Anyone who exercises knows from

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (E)

The advertisement argues that since your brain is a physical organ, your actions can improve it just as your actions improve your muscles, and you should therefore subscribe to Stimulus, the magazine that exercises your brain.

The reasoning in the stimulus is questionable, because the stimulus makes an analogy between the muscles and the brain. Just because they are all physical organs does not mean that they will be similar in all respects.

Answer choice (A) The stimulus cites no such experimental evidence.

Answer choice (B) The stimulus is entirely positive, and it is difficult to see how it could be interpreted as ridiculing those who do not read Stimulus.

Answer choice (C) The stimulus suggests that exercise is important, but does not describe any specific process.

Answer choice (D) The argument's analysis of the concept of exercise is anything but careful.

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice. The argument is based on a possibly incorrect analogy between the musculature and brain, and it is entirely acceptable for the correct answer choice to leave out the idea that the analogy may be incorrect, especially since the question stem does not mention any flaws.

[laurat]

Hi,

None of the answers looked good to me, and I'm struggling to see the implied and actual similarities between brains and muscle mentioned in E. I assume the actual similarity is that both brains and muscle are improved by exercise, but I don't see how that implies anything. In the stimulus the brain, as a physical organ, would be improved along with the heart and lungs but I don't see any additional relationship to muscles, aside from the their correlating improvement. My prephrase was that the argument generalizes that all physical organs respond the same way to exercise. E parallels that but is fundamentally different. Why am I on the wrong track?

Thanks!

(7-58)

[Jonathan Evans]

Laurat,

I'm with you! This is a very flawed argument! It involves both a questionable analogy and a shift in meaning. Such arguments can frustrate students because our reaction is often along the lines of "What the heck? This argument stinks!" When an argument is terrible, sometimes it's hard to parse it out to see exactly what the author was doing.

In this case, to come up with a strong prephrase, we should focus on the flaws here. Start by breaking it apart and describing what's happening. Identify the conclusion:

• Subscribe to this magazine.

Why does the author think we should do this?

1. The magazine exercises the brain.
2. The brain is a physical organ.
3. Muscles are physical organs.
4. Exercise strengthens muscles.

Once you describe the key components, then try to describe the implied connection between them. The author assumes that:

1. Two different kinds of exercise (physical and mental) are analogous.
2. The fact that both muscles and the brain are physical organs means that what is good for one is likely good for the other.

The question asks you to describe one argumentative strategy. Either (a) or (b) would work for a prephrase.

Answer Choice (E) is the only match, specifically to assumption (b) above. Note the droll tone and inside-joke style of this question, specifically in Answer Choice (D):

• It supports its recommendation by a careful analysis of the concept of exercise.

Ha. Ha. Ha. Very funny LSAC.

I hope this helps!

[EL16]

Hi,

I am struggling to understand why E is correct. Looking at Jonathan's post above, he states that the author thinks we should subscribe to the magazine because "3. Muscles are physical organs." However, I am having trouble finding where it says this in the stimulus. It says that "exercise leads to better performance of such physical organs as the heart and the lungs", and then it says that exercise also ("as well as)" improves "muscle tone". Using "as well as" between "physical organs" and "muscle tone" implies to me that these are two separate ideas, and therefore improving "muscle tone" is not synonymous with muscles being a physical organ. Could you please help to explain how you knew to assume muscles are physical organs that are being exercised/better performing here?

Thanks,
Elana

[Francis O'Rourke]

Hi EL,

There is no explicit connection between "muscles" and "physical organs." You are right that the phrase "as well as" separates these ideas. It is possible to explain this as 'common knowledge' that the LSAT is assuming: muscles are physical organs. However that is always a frustrating answer when you don't have that 'common' knowledge.

Here's another way of thinking about it. This ad tells us that exercise improves two specific physical organs, improves muscles, and then concludes that exercise improves your brain as well. Ask yourself at this point why the advertisement would throw the fact about muscles in there if it is not assuming that muscles are physical organs.

Since this magazine is offering evidence of exercise improving muscles in order to convince you that exercise improves your brain, the ad must assume that muscles are organs as well. If the ad does not believe this, there would be absolutely no reason for them to include this information. At the very least, they are trying to suggest to the audience that brains and muscles are similar in some way.

[EL16]

Hi Francis,

Thanks for your help! Your explanation helped cleared this up for me.

I think I actually accidentally brought in some outside knowledge knowing that muscles are NOT physical organs (generally speaking), since muscles are primarily tissues. So I think this knowledge automatically ruled out the possibility for the stimulus to be assuming muscles are physical organs, and definitely got in the way for me here. I am having trouble knowing when to assume common knowledge, versus when to ensure that I am only taking information/assumptions from the stimulus. This question is really the perfect example of even when common knowledge should be assumed, it doesn't always seem to be correct...

Thanks for your help!
Elana

[andriana.caban]

If (C) were correct, what would that look like?

Would the author explain a specific type of exercise, or how exercise leads to better performance. If the author had said: when someone exercises the blood rushes to your muscles quickly through a process called X. Since the blood also rushes to your brain during any activity in which you use it, you should subscribe to our magazine for better performance.

Would (C) be correct then?

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi Andriana,

Let's start by looking at what answer choice (c) describes. It explains the process by which the product being advertised brings about the result claimed for its use. Clear as mud, right?

Let's break it down further.

It explains the process (not done here) by which the product (the magazine) brings about the result (improved brain performance).

We would need to know the process that the magazine uses to improve brain performance. Does reading the magazine physically move your brain muscles, making them faster and more efficient? Does it release chemicals in your brain that make it stronger? Does moving your eyes across the page somehow activate part of your brain? We need to know what the process is by which the magazine improves brain function.

Your example is fairly close. You'd want it to say something like this: Reading our magazine causes blood to rush to the brain, speeding the chemical signals between brain cells, which in turn leads to faster response time. Subscribing to our magazine will improve your brain performance.

Hope that helps!
Rachael

[SammyWu11201]

I get that E is right because the stimulus does employ an analogy, but D is very tempting for me. How is it not a careful analysis of exercise, as Answer Choice D suggests? What would it require for it to be a careful analysis of exercise?

[Robert Carroll]

Sammy,

I think your question is about this question instead [admin note: posts moved to the correct thread]. Check this thread above and let us know if you have any questions about the explanations!

Robert Carroll