#2 - Sheila: It has been argued that using computer

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

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

In this stimulus, Sheila asserts that movie colorization does not damage the integrity of the original film. She supports this conclusion by comparing movie colorization to the creation of a movie adaptation of a film or short story, which, Sheila says, no one would argue against.

The question asks for the answer choice which best describes Sheila’s argumentation, which is very clear in this case. She makes a case for colorization through comparison to film adaptation.

Correct answer choice (A) describes the answer prephrased above: her argument appeals to an analogy (or comparison) to a similar case (that of movie adaptations of books and short stories).

Answer choice (B) is wrong because the adaptation reference is made not as a counterexample to a general principle, but as a comparison to what Sheila sees as a similar case. Answer choices (C) and (D) are incorrect, because there is neither appeal to public opinion nor distinction of fact from value judgment. Answer choice (E) is incorrect, because there is no inference drawn; rather, Sheila draws an analogy to support her conclusion.

[quiz555]

Hello, my question is a Method of Reasoning one: Dec 2000, Section 1, Question # 2.

I was caught up with answer choices A, B, and C.

I ultimately answered the question correctly, but am having a somewhat difficult time disproving the other answer choices that seemed attractive to me at first.

I have a couple of questions:

1. What exactly does an analogy mean on the LSAT?
2. Does the second sentence qualify as appealing to popular opinion? And if so, is it the second part of answer choice C that deems it incorrect?

Thank you in advance!

[Jon Denning]

Thanks for the question. Sheila's reasoning is that adding color to a movie originally filmed in black and white does not damage the integrity of the original film, and she makes this argument by using an analogy: adapting a book/story into a movie does not damage the integrity of the original book/story (the film in both cases is distinct from the source material). An analogy on the LSAT (and in life, really) can be thought of as a comparison between two things, where an opinion about one thing is drawn or defended because that opinion holds true for a parallel/related case. Here the comparison is between taking a black and white film and adding color (new movie is distinct), and taking a book and turning it into a movie (new movie is distinct). And that is why A is correct.

B is incorrect because no counterexample is offered to try to argue against some broad, stated belief. That would be like if someone said "adding color to a movie originally filmed in B&W is bad," and Sheila listed a specific movie where that happened that was universally seen as acceptable/not bad.

C is incorrect because she never discusses popular opinion, or what the majority of, say, movie viewers believe. That argument would be something like "but it doesn't damage the integrity of the original when we add color to it, because almost everyone who watches movies where color has been added really enjoys the colorized version." The second sentence isn't an appeal to popular opinion on the subject at hand (adding color), but rather a statement of general belief about the parallel example/analogy (adapting a book).

I hope this helps!

Jon

[quiz555]

Yes, that helps!

Thank You Jon!

P.S. I liked the free first lesson virtual course so much I bought a whole archived course (reinstated version) with you as the instructor.

You truly are great! You wouldn't imagine how much that has helped me! Now, I have so much confidence moving forward with the LSAT thanks to you.

Thanks again!

[Jon Denning]

Happy to help! And glad to hear that you found those archives useful - that virtual course really is an amazing resource for teachers and students alike, so much so that even the recorded sessions of a prior course can be supremely beneficial. So I'm really pleased to hear that you've gotten so much out of it. Let us know if there's anything else we can help you with!

Jon

[uchong]

Does "no one argues that we should not base a movie on a novel or short story..." indicate a popular opinion? If so, how is answer (C) incorrect?

[Paul Marsh]

Hi uchong! Great question. You're right that the sentence you referenced does seem to at least somewhat make an appeal to popular opinion. Nice job spotting that. However, remember that this is a Method question (not a Flaw question!). We're not diagnosing little problems with the argument, instead we want an abstract one sentence description of how the argument as a whole is functioning. We're asking, "generally how is the author arguing their point?". Is the crux of Sheila's argument an appeal to popular opinion? No. The possible appeal to popular opinion you referenced is an offhand comment at the start of her analogy. Popular opinion is not the main support she is using to get to her claim. The bigger abstract picture here is that she's relying on an analogy to reach her conclusion.

Hope that helps!

[uchong]

Thanks Paul!

[dshen123]

Can someone please explain why B is incorrect? I thought the general principle is the 2nd sentence, and S provides a counter-example to that.