#23 - Film preservation requires transferring old movies

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Assumption. The correct answer choice is (D)

The stimulus contains the following structure:

• Premise: Film preservation requires transferring old movies from their original,
  deteriorating nitrate film to stable acetate film, which is a time-consuming and
  expensive process.
  
  Sub. Concl.: There is no way to transfer all currently deteriorating nitrate films to acetate
  before they disintegrate.
  
  Conclusion: Some films from the earliest years of Hollywood will not be preserved.

Take a closer look at the conclusion: “some films from the earliest years of Hollywood will not
be preserved.” All we know from the premises is that some deteriorating nitrate films will not be
preserved: that alone does not mean that some films from the earliest years of Hollywood will not be
preserved. What if all of them have already been transferred to acetate? And even if they have not,
there is no reason to suspect that these films in particular will be the ones that never get transferred
to acetate.

Because this is an assumption question, the answer you select must contain a statement upon which
the argument depends, i.e. a statement that is necessary for the conclusion to be true. Typically, if
you see a new or “rogue” element in the conclusion, look for a Supporter assumption answer that
links the new element back to the premises. Since “films from the earliest years of Hollywood” did
not appear anywhere else in the argument, the Supporter assumption must state that at least some
films from the earliest years of Hollywood still exist in their original material (and are therefore
deteriorating). This prephrase reveals answer choice (D) to be correct.

Answer choice (A): This answer choice may seem attractive, because it supports the idea that some
currently deteriorating nitrate films will never be preserved. To double-check if this is an assumption,
apply the Assumption Negation Technique—logically negate the answer and ask yourself if the
following statement would undermine the argument:

• A new technology for transferring old movies from nitrate film to acetate film
  will be developed at some point in the future.

Even if a new technology for transferring old movies to acetate is invented in the future, it is still
possible that some films from the earliest years of Hollywood are irrevocably lost. Recall the
author’s assertion that “there is no way to transfer all currently deteriorating nitrate films to acetate
before they disintegrate.” Clearly, unless the new technology is developed and implemented in
the immediate future, there is a significant risk that the films currently deteriorating will have
disintegrated by the time the new technology becomes viable.

Since the logical opposite of answer choice (A) does not weaken the conclusion, this is not an
assumption upon which the argument depends.

Savvy test takers would eliminate answer choice (A) immediately, because it does not make any
mention of the rogue element in the conclusion (“films from the earliest years of Hollywood”).
Given that Supporters connect new elements, one would suspect that the correct answer would
include this element.

Answer choice (B): The author never discussed the cost of film preservation, and no assumption was
made regarding the relative cost of transferring films from nitrate to acetate. Because an assumption
is something the author believed when forming the argument, correct assumption answers cannot
contain extraneous information. This answer choice can also be eliminated because it does not make
any mention of the rogue element in the conclusion.

Answer choice (C): This answer choice may seem attractive because it strengthens the conclusion of
the argument. Indeed, if only a few films from the earliest years of Hollywood have been transferred
to acetate, it is even more likely that time will run out before we can transfer the rest. However, just
because a statement supports the conclusion does not mean it is necessary for the conclusion to
be true. Apply the Assumption Negation Technique—drop the negative term (“not many”) and ask
yourself, “What would the author say to this negation?”

• Many films from the earliest years of Hollywood have already been
  transferred to acetate.

The author would reply that “many” does not mean “all,” and that a sufficiently high number of nontransferred
films can still disintegrate before they are preserved. Since the logical opposite of answer
choice (C) does not weaken the conclusion, this is not an assumption upon which the argument
depends.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice, as it is consistent with our prephrase of the
Supporter Assumption. Consider the author’s conclusion that “some films from the earliest years
of Hollywood will not be preserved.” Clearly, her conclusion depends on the idea that at least some
films from the earliest years of Hollywood have not yet been transferred from nitrate to acetate, and
therefore exist solely in their original material.

If this answer is troubling you, use the Assumption Negation Technique and ask yourself if the
following statement would undermine the argument:

• None of films from the earliest years of Hollywood currently exist solely in
  their original material.

This clearly shows that the author’s concerns are unfounded, since no films from the earliest years of
Hollywood would be in danger of disintegrating. Because the logical opposite of answer choice (D)
attacks the argument, this must be the correct answer.

Remember—when an Assumption answer choice starts with a phrase such as “at least one” or
“some,” chances are high that the answer will be correct. Although you should not immediately
assume that it is, use the proper negation (“none”) to check it by using the Assumption Negation
Technique.

Answer choice (E): The author makes no statement regarding the kind of films that are the most likely to disintegrate. Therefore, there is no way to determine if an assumption has been made associating the relative popularity of these films with their likelihood of being lost.

In general, avoid answers to Assumption questions containing phrases such as “most” and “least.” An
assumption can be considered a “minimalist” answer, and cannot contain exaggerations or elements
that are extraneous to the argument.

[mkuo]

Ok this PT is really killing me...

Could someone please point out why (D) is a better choice than (C)?

Is it because it more concretely points out that there are definitely some earliest Hollywood films still exist in original material? where as (C) merely has that implication?

"Not many films from earliest years have already been transferred to acetate"... does it not mean that "some are still in any other form but acetate", which cannot be preserved?

Thanks for helping out!

[Steve Stein]

Hi mkuo,

Good question. This author says that since there is no way to transfer all deteriorating nitrate films, some movies from the earliest years of Hollywood will be lost.

The author thinks that just because we can't save every single nitrate film, we can't save the earliest ones.

To test the answer choices to an Assumption question, we apply PowerScore's Assumption Negation technique; the right answer choice will be the one on which the author's argument depends, so when we negate, or take away, the correct answer, the author's argument will falter.

Answer choice D provides that some of those earliest Hollywood films have never been made on anything other than the original nitrate. When we negate, or take away, that assumption, we get the following:

None of those early Hollywood films are limited to their original nitrate form.

If that is indeed the case, then the author's argument fails--just because we can't save every nitrate film, given this negated answer choice, the earliest films don't necessarily have to be lost.

One problem with answer choice C is that "many" is a pretty vague claim. When we negate this answer choice, we get the following:

Many of the earliest films have already been transferred.

Since "many" is so vague, this still leaves open the possibility that the vast majority of those earliest films are still in desperate need of transfer.

Since the negated version of answer choice C does not kill the author's argument, this cannot be an assumption on which that argument relies.

I hope that's helpful--let me know--thanks!

~Steve

[ddion8206]

Powerscore,

Could some explain the answer for DEC 2010 LR2 23 for me? It seems that the harder questions appear later in the section which is hurting my LR Score, any strategies to deal with the harder problems? Any help will be greatly appreciated! Please! Thank you!

Best,
Daniel Dion

[Lucas Moreau]

Hello, ddion,

This one relies on the conclusion: "some films from the earliest years of Hollywood will not be preserved."

We must accept the premise that we can't save every nitrate film from disintegration, as that's how premises work. Since film preservation relies on transferring to acetate, and we can't save every nitrate film, it is true from those alone that we will not preserve every single copy of every single film currently existing.

But is it true that we will lose some films from the earliest years of Hollywood? Not necessarily. What if some film restoration experts from 20 or 30 years ago copied all the early Hollywood films that were still on nitrate onto VHS tape? Or what if someone did it 10 years ago onto CD or DVD?

This conclusion only follows if answer choice D is true, and that some of the films from the earliest years of Hollywood have no copies anywhere that aren't on nitrate.

Hope that helps,
Lucas Moreau

[NeverMissing]

I'm having trouble understanding why answer choice A is not also an assumption on which the argument depends. The argument premises, as I see them, are thus:

Premises: Preservation requires transfer

Premises: We can't do it all in time

Conclusion: Some early films will be lost

(copy of the question removed due to copyright; paraphrased it instead. - Adam)

For this conclusion to be correct, would we not have to assume that the film-transfer process described in the two premises will never benefit from new technological advances that might speed up the process, thus making it possible to transfer all nitrate film to acetate before the disintegration process occurs? If this assumption were negated and this new technology WOULD be developed, would it not undermine the conclusion (because, with the new technology, all nitrate films could be transferred more quickly, and thus, the transfer process could be completed before the old films disintegrate entirely?)

Any clarification would be helpful!

[Adam Tyson]

Thanks for the question, NeverMissing, and welcome aboard! That's a very bold, confident user name - I like it!

Here's the thing about answer A - when we negate it, we get that some new technology will someday be developed. That might weaken the argument IF that tech is developed soon enough, and IF that tech is faster than the current tech, But we can't know that the new tech will be any faster than the old tech (maybe it will just be less expensive, or more environmentally friendly, or do a better job of preserving color or sound quality?), and we can't know from this answer choice that it will arrive before the oldest films are already lost.

In your question it looks like you assumed that the new tech would be faster. Don't help the answer choices, but take them as they are given. Helping an answer is like helping the authors of the test, who are your sworn enemy (I exaggerate a bit). Never give aid and comfort to the enemy! Also, when we use the negation technique we are looking to do more than undermine (weaken) the conclusion; we want to deal it a fatal blow, knock it on its butt, send it packing, eat its lunch and drop the mic.

Since the negation fails to destroy the argument, while the negation of D does destroy it, D is the better answer, and must therefore be the credited response.

I hope that helps, and that your user name proves to be prophetic!

[kcho10]

Hi,

I am still having trouble justifying D over C. They both seem to have a flaw. D is saying that some exist solely in their original form. The negation would be, as you said, that no films exist solely in their original form. However, that doesn't mean that they are all acetate either. They could be in some other film type that is just as likely to deteriorate. So this seems to be an exaggerated answer. I understand that sometimes there is no perfect answer, but if this happens on test day how can I determine that D is any less flawed than C?

Thank you very much

[James Finch]

Hi kcho10,

I think there may be some confusion regarding the stimulus. The first sentence is stating that the original material for all old movies is the disintegrating nitrate film. The next sentence states that not all of the films on nitrate can be preserved by transfer to stable acetate film. Putting these two premises together, the conclusion states that some old movies won't be preserved. Remember, "some" can mean anything from a single instance to all/100% of things, so as long as any movies can't be preserved, the conclusion is logically true.

This is an Assumption question, which often yield powerful Prephrases, so the first thing to look for is whether there is a missing premise needed (Supporter Assumption) to make the conclusion logically true. It doesn't look like it, so that leaves us with a Defender Assumption that will fight off a possible angle of attack. With those, it can be worthwhile to think if there is an obvious angle of attack before diving into the answer choices, although you don't want to spend too much time brainstorming. Here, there isn't really an obvious attack, so let's look at the answer choices:

(A)--Irrelevant, since we're given that we don't have enough time to do all the transfers, which isn't said to be dependent on technology

(B)--Irrelevant, expense is not an issue here.

(C)--Sounds promising, but the devil is in the details. The scope of "many" is different from what we're given in the premises, and vague to boot. Using the Assumption Negation technique, we see:

Many films transferred All films will be preserved

Negating this answer choice, we can see that the "many" is simply too vague to work, and leaves open the possibility that some films wouldn't be preserved.

(D)--Another promising answer. By giving us another premise that says that some films haven't already been transferred, we can combine the second sentence in the stimulus to get to the conclusion. But let's test it with the Assumption Negation technique to be sure:

No old movies exist solely in their original material All films will be preserved

Works out, so this is our correct answer.

(E)--Irrevelant, popularity isn't a part of the reasoning.

Hope this clears things up!

[PB410]

This is a question regarding negating answer choices.
Couldn't "not many" mean "some", just as "not all" means "some"?
If it were "not all", would I negate it to "all" or to the opposite of "some", which is "none", as in the negation of answer D?
So the confusion I had was to treat "not many" as "some", which would yield a negation of "none", not "many".
Thanks