#3 - Humorous television advertisements are the only

[Alex Bodaken]

Harvoolio,

I think you are actually quite close to working this out for yourself - which is awesome. Hopefully I can help a bit.

We have a couple of conditional statements:

(S) Effective -> (N) Conveys message
(S) Humorous -> (N) Conveys message, Attract attention

These statements can't really be chained in any way. But the flaw in the answer is that it treats a sufficient condition (humorous) as being the only possible sufficient condition that could convey a message. But for all we know, there could be plenty of other ways to convey a message and be "effective." You are correct when you say that if (c) were flipped, it would be a flaw: it does treat a sufficient condition (humorous) as necessary...when it is not. It doesn't say that conveying a message is a sufficient condition. I hope that helps!

AB

[harvoolio]

Thanks Alex. I ask these hypothetical questions to see if my underlying grasp of the logic is sound.

So, Alex, even if answer choice (c) were reversed it would still be incorrect because treating a sufficient condition for an advertisement's being effective as if it were a necessary condition" would be creating another necessary condition (i.e. If an advertisement is effective it must convey its message and hold people's attention long enough to convey a message), but this extra condition still would not be the flaw, because even so the stimulus is relying upon (a) "that nothing but humor can meet the one criteria (convey its message as stated in the stimulus) or these now two criteria in order to conclude that "Humorous television advertisements are the only effective ones."

Is this correct? Thanks.

[Alex Bodaken]

Harvoolio,

I am sorry if my last response was confusing - I am saying that if, in fact (C) were reversed and read "It treats a sufficient condition for an advertisement’s being effective as if it were a necessary condition" it would be a flaw (and therefore, correct). This is because "humorous" is a sufficient condition, but it is not necessary - i.e., there are potentially other ways for an advertisement to convey its message. But since (C) reads the way it does, it is not a correct answer, and (A) is correct.

Thanks,
Alex

[cspertus]

I had a quick question that isn't directly related to the answer choices but I just wanted to confirm what conclusions could be drawn from the given premises.

Conclusion: Effective humorous
Premise: humorous convey message
Premise: effective ads convey message

Am I correct that we can't conclude much from these statements... we still cannot conclude whether or not some effective ads are humorous (because humorous and efficacy may not overlap although both must convey messages).
We can only conclude that some ads that aren't humorous are ineffective: /H /IE.... right?

[cspertus]

I had a quick question that isn't directly related to the answer choices but I just wanted to confirm what conclusions could be drawn from the given premises.

Conclusion: Effective humorous
Premise: humorous convey message
Premise: effective ads convey message

Am I correct that we can't conclude much from these statements... we still cannot conclude whether or not some effective ads are humorous (because humorous and efficacy may not overlap although both must convey messages).
We can only conclude that some ads that aren't humorous are ineffective: /H /IE.... right?

And we cannot conclude whether or not humorous ads are effective... just because they both bring about the same necessary conditions does not imply overlap, correct?

[KelseyWoods]

Hi cspertus!

You are correct that we cannot really conclude much from these statements. "Convey message" is just something that is necessary for both humorous ads and effective ads, but we cannot connect "humorous" to "effective" just because they are both sufficient for "convey message." There doesn't have to be any overlap between these two terms.

Here are the things we know must be true based on the premises:

Premise: humorous convey message
MBT: humorous convey message
MBT: humorous convey message
MBT: convey message humorous
MBT: convey message humorous
MBT: convey message humorous

Premise: effective ads convey message
MBT: effective ads convey message
MBT: effective ads convey message
MBT: convey message effective ads
MBT: convey message effective ads
MBT: convey message effective ads

So, yes, as you stated, the only real way to connect any of these statements is to say:
humorous convey message effective ads
humorous effective ads

Good job analyzing those conditional relationships!

Best,
Kelsey

[cspertus]

Hi cspertus!

You are correct that we cannot really conclude much from these statements. "Convey message" is just something that is necessary for both humorous ads and effective ads, but we cannot connect "humorous" to "effective" just because they are both sufficient for "convey message." There doesn't have to be any overlap between these two terms.

Here are the things we know must be true based on the premises:

Premise: humorous convey message
MBT: humorous convey message
MBT: humorous convey message
MBT: convey message humorous
MBT: convey message humorous
MBT: convey message humorous

Premise: effective ads convey message
MBT: effective ads convey message
MBT: effective ads convey message
MBT: convey message effective ads
MBT: convey message effective ads
MBT: convey message effective ads

So, yes, as you stated, the only real way to connect any of these statements is to say:
humorous convey message effective ads
humorous effective ads

Good job analyzing those conditional relationships!

Best,
Kelsey

Hi Kelsey!

Thank you so much for your response; super helpful. I guess I just have one follow up... if we cannot actually conclude from the premises that humorous ads are effective (let alone the only effective ones), isn't the author making a mistake... a mistaken reversal (by assuming convey message effective in order to arrive at the conclusion that humorous effective)? How can he say that humorous TV ads are the only effective ones when we don't even know if humorous ads are effective, period?

I see how A is the mistake if the premises had proven that humorous ads actually were effective but don't understand how that is the answer choice otherwise.

[Jeremy Press]

Hi cspertus,

There's definitely a dual flaw here, which you occasionally see in these types of questions. First, there's the Mistaken Reversal you point out (the reversal through which the author illicitly creates the chain: Humor ---> Convey Message ---> Effective). Second, there's the additional Mistaken Reversal (relying on the first one) through which the author concludes that humor is necessary to effectiveness. Both are mistakes. Both could be described in the answer. Answer choice A focuses on the second flaw. That doesn't mean it's a wrong answer. It just means it didn't describe every flaw present in the stimulus. But it's not necessary for a Flaw correct answer to describe or reference every flaw in the stimulus, so the answer still works.

I hope this helps!

[relona]

Complete Question Explanation

Flaw in the Reasoning—SN. The correct answer choice is (A)

The stimulus contains a series of conditional statements, and the logical flaw results from how these statements relate to each other. To fully describe how this flaw occurs takes a bit of effort, and some patience on your part.

Note that the first sentence in the stimulus is the conclusion. While there is no explicit conclusion indicator identifying the first sentence as the conclusion, it is supported by the second sentence, which begins with “for,” a premise indicator.

The conclusion is that humorous television advertisements are the only effective ones. This is a very restrictive conclusion, and can be restated as “television advertisements must be humorous in order to be effective.” Using “E” for “effective” and “H” for “humorous:”

• AdE AdH

The connection between humor and effectiveness offered by the argument has to do with the ability of an advertisement to convey its message. This connection is seen most clearly by beginning with the last sentence of the stimulus, which tells you that an advertisement must convey its message (“CM”) to be effective. This also is a conditional relationship:

• AdE AdCM

The second sentence in the stimulus is a premise providing the conditional relationship that if something is humorous (“H”), then it will hold a person’s attention long enough for a message to be conveyed (“HPA-CM”):

• H HPA-CM

The conclusion results from a Mistaken Reversal of this conditional relationship in the second sentence. Instead of the relationship actually contained in the second sentence, just described as

• H HPA-CM

the argument treats this term as

• HPA-CM H

This presents a bit of difficulty, because we now need to consider this new, mistaken relationship from the perspective of its contrapositive to fully understand the implications of the mistake. The contrapositive is:

• H HPA-CM

This representation provides that “if something is not humorous, then it cannot hold people’s attention long enough for a message to be conveyed.” Taking this a step further, if something cannot hold people’s attention long enough for a message to be conveyed, then it will not, in fact, convey its message. So, an inherent implication of this Mistaken Reversal is this relationship:

• H CM

The contrapositive of this relationship is:

• CM H

While rather tedious, this more in depth examination of the Mistaken Reversal was necessary, because it provides us with the term:

• (CM H)

used by the stimulus to reach the conclusion. So, all together, this is the invalid argument contained in the stimulus:

• Premise: AdE AdCM
  
  Premise: CM H (the result of the Mistaken Reversal)
  
  Combined: AdE AdCM AdH
  
  Conclusion: AdE AdH (dropping the common term, “AdCM”)

So, your prephrase in this Method of Reasoning—Flaw question is that the argument is flawed because it assumes the Mistaken Reversal of the relationship in the second sentence: it treats being humorous as if it were necessary to convey a message, when the premise actually provided that being humorous is sufficient to hold people’s attention long enough for a message to be conveyed.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice, because it describes the Mistaken Reversal detailed above. In this choice, the phrase “nothing but humor” indicates that humor is necessary for something to attract a person’s attention and hold it long enough for a message to be conveyed.

Answer choice (B): This choice is incorrect because it is inconsistent with the stimulus. In the second sentence, the stimulus expressly treated attracting a person’s attention as distinct from holding a person’s attention long enough for a message to be conveyed.

Answer choice (C): In the last sentence of the stimulus, the condition presented as necessary for an advertisement’s being effective was that the advertisement must convey its message. This necessary condition was not then treated by the argument as if it were a sufficient condition. Instead, as described above, the Mistaken Reversal that actually occurred in the stimulus involved being humorous.

Answer choice (D): The word “effective” was not treated ambiguously in the stimulus. The word was used twice, and on each occasion was used in the sense of producing an intended result.

Answer choice (E): The stimulus did not imply that an advertisement’s only purpose is to convey its message. Instead, the argument implied that an advertisement is effective only if it conveys its message.

Hi

This question was very difficult for me and because of time, I wasn't able to look at it that closely. I have read the question's entire thread but I still don't see where the mistaken reversal happened. I didn't choose (A) because it's an obvious type of answer but I didn't see anything in the stimulus showing it to be correct. Could you please explain where mistaken reversal came from and how it led to answer choice (A)?

Thanks

-relona

[Adam Tyson]

Sure thing, relona! The premise is that if an ad is humorous, it will hold your attention long enough to convey a message. The conclusion is that any ad that does that must be humorous. Humor is sufficient in the premises, but the author treats it as necessary in the conclusion, which is a Mistaken Reversal.