Method of Reasoning - LSAT Logical Reasoning
Card 0 of 112
Joey: We do not need to drink more water. We would only need to drink more water if we were dehydrated.
John: The fact that we are dehydrated is exactly why we need to drink more water.
John's response to Joey functions to:
Joey: We do not need to drink more water. We would only need to drink more water if we were dehydrated.
John: The fact that we are dehydrated is exactly why we need to drink more water.
John's response to Joey functions to:
Tap to see back →
John does not accept Joey's implicit premise/assumption, which is that they are not dehydrated. He then concludes, on the basis that Joey's premise of not being dehydratd is false, that in fact their dehydration means they should drink water.
John does not accept Joey's implicit premise/assumption, which is that they are not dehydrated. He then concludes, on the basis that Joey's premise of not being dehydratd is false, that in fact their dehydration means they should drink water.
Andrew: We regulate oil and gas, car exhaust, pesticides, and chemicals because, while companies argue that they are necessary for economic growth, they cause environmental pollution that can be harmful to health. Car alarms also cause environmental pollution in the form of loud noises, but we need cars (and alarms), so we should regulate them the way we do chemicals.
Alicia: Oil and gas, car exhaust, pesticides, and chemicals harm physical health, while car alarms are just annoying. We do not need to regulate them the same way.
Alicia's response to Andrew's argument can best be characterized as:
Andrew: We regulate oil and gas, car exhaust, pesticides, and chemicals because, while companies argue that they are necessary for economic growth, they cause environmental pollution that can be harmful to health. Car alarms also cause environmental pollution in the form of loud noises, but we need cars (and alarms), so we should regulate them the way we do chemicals.
Alicia: Oil and gas, car exhaust, pesticides, and chemicals harm physical health, while car alarms are just annoying. We do not need to regulate them the same way.
Alicia's response to Andrew's argument can best be characterized as:
Tap to see back →
Alicia is questioning Andrew's assertion that the type of harm that comes from car alarms (and justifies regulation in his argument) is similar to the harm that comes from chemical pollution.
Alicia is questioning Andrew's assertion that the type of harm that comes from car alarms (and justifies regulation in his argument) is similar to the harm that comes from chemical pollution.
The government is considering a new round of massive government spending. The opposition party has firmly come out against this new policy. They have argued that an expansion of government spending would both increase the debt and possibly cause inflation. In spite of these arguments, the government should adopt a new round of government spending. The economy remains below its optimal level of output and interest rates are at an all-time low. Only an increase in government spending can reduce the unemployment rate and get people back to work.
The argument proceeds by arguing that
The government is considering a new round of massive government spending. The opposition party has firmly come out against this new policy. They have argued that an expansion of government spending would both increase the debt and possibly cause inflation. In spite of these arguments, the government should adopt a new round of government spending. The economy remains below its optimal level of output and interest rates are at an all-time low. Only an increase in government spending can reduce the unemployment rate and get people back to work.
The argument proceeds by arguing that
Tap to see back →
We are looking for a premise that helps support the conclusion to answer this question. The stimulus has two premises that help support that the new round of government spending is a good idea; it will reduce the unemployment rate and it will get people back to work. The correct answer provides one of those premises.
We are looking for a premise that helps support the conclusion to answer this question. The stimulus has two premises that help support that the new round of government spending is a good idea; it will reduce the unemployment rate and it will get people back to work. The correct answer provides one of those premises.
Bill: Popular musicians today cannot find much success through the traditional routes. Since nearly all of their songs are now available for easy access on streaming web sites and services, they cannot hope to make money by selling albums. Now they must focus on live shows, and must increase the shows’ ticket prices if they hope to gain any profit.
Karen: Why do you think success should only be measured in terms of direct sales? Much of the job of musicians is to publicize themselves, and any exposure they can get is useful in the long run, even if initially they don’t receive immediate royalties. This was true even before the digital age.
Karen responds to Bill’s argument by
Bill: Popular musicians today cannot find much success through the traditional routes. Since nearly all of their songs are now available for easy access on streaming web sites and services, they cannot hope to make money by selling albums. Now they must focus on live shows, and must increase the shows’ ticket prices if they hope to gain any profit.
Karen: Why do you think success should only be measured in terms of direct sales? Much of the job of musicians is to publicize themselves, and any exposure they can get is useful in the long run, even if initially they don’t receive immediate royalties. This was true even before the digital age.
Karen responds to Bill’s argument by
Tap to see back →
Karen does not argue against Bill’s conclusion directly, but rather offers an alternate standard by which to evaluate the commercial “success” of musicians. Thus, Karen does not claim Bill’s reasoning is fallacious nor that any of his premises are incorrect; she merely reframes the argument by focusing on one of its key terms.
Karen does not argue against Bill’s conclusion directly, but rather offers an alternate standard by which to evaluate the commercial “success” of musicians. Thus, Karen does not claim Bill’s reasoning is fallacious nor that any of his premises are incorrect; she merely reframes the argument by focusing on one of its key terms.
A small shop has a policy that in order to sell fruit at the front of the store, it must be both organic and locally grown. Recently, a producer who has farmland slightly more than a quarter of a mile away wanted to have his persimmons sold at the store and showcased in the store’s large wooden display case. Upon receiving his request, the storeowners did a background check and determined that the farmer’s produce was in fact organic. Therefore, the storeowners allowed the farmer’s persimmons to be sold as he had requested.
The argument’s conclusion follows logically if which of the following is assumed to be true?
A small shop has a policy that in order to sell fruit at the front of the store, it must be both organic and locally grown. Recently, a producer who has farmland slightly more than a quarter of a mile away wanted to have his persimmons sold at the store and showcased in the store’s large wooden display case. Upon receiving his request, the storeowners did a background check and determined that the farmer’s produce was in fact organic. Therefore, the storeowners allowed the farmer’s persimmons to be sold as he had requested.
The argument’s conclusion follows logically if which of the following is assumed to be true?
Tap to see back →
The passage explains that the farmer’s persimmons are organic, and a reasonable inference can be made that they are also locally grown. Given that the passage states that “…therefore” the farmer may sell the persimmons in the shop, the argument will only logically flow if it is required that the farmer’s persimmons be both organic and locally grown. Given that these are the same prerequisites for selling the fruit at the front of the store, "Only fruit that would be allowed in the front of the store can be showcased in the store’s large wooden display case" is the correct answer. None of the other answer choices make it clear that it is required for the persimmons to be both organic and locally grown.
The passage explains that the farmer’s persimmons are organic, and a reasonable inference can be made that they are also locally grown. Given that the passage states that “…therefore” the farmer may sell the persimmons in the shop, the argument will only logically flow if it is required that the farmer’s persimmons be both organic and locally grown. Given that these are the same prerequisites for selling the fruit at the front of the store, "Only fruit that would be allowed in the front of the store can be showcased in the store’s large wooden display case" is the correct answer. None of the other answer choices make it clear that it is required for the persimmons to be both organic and locally grown.
Publisher: It is usually not a good idea for a first-time author to begin with a novel which the author intends to become part of a series. Most series novels are not published, but publishing companies are more likely to make series deals with authors who have previously published at least one stand-alone novel. If the stand-alone novel is a success, it is a good possibility that a subsequent series by that author will also be successful.
Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the publisher’s argument by the statement that most series novels are not published?
Publisher: It is usually not a good idea for a first-time author to begin with a novel which the author intends to become part of a series. Most series novels are not published, but publishing companies are more likely to make series deals with authors who have previously published at least one stand-alone novel. If the stand-alone novel is a success, it is a good possibility that a subsequent series by that author will also be successful.
Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the publisher’s argument by the statement that most series novels are not published?
Tap to see back →
While not vital to the argument, the claim that most series novels are not published is used to lead to the argument’s main premise, which is that publishing a stand-alone novel gives authors a better chance of later publishing a series. The statement does not weaken the argument, but rather puts it in context.
While not vital to the argument, the claim that most series novels are not published is used to lead to the argument’s main premise, which is that publishing a stand-alone novel gives authors a better chance of later publishing a series. The statement does not weaken the argument, but rather puts it in context.
Frank: I’m tired of hearing people talk about ghosts and disembodied spirits nowadays. Everyone knows that thousands of years ago these supernatural forces were given as explanations for phenomena which we could not explain. Now that we have a scientific explanation for these occurrences, there’s no reason to go back to the old myths.
Annie: These old myths, while they might not sound as logical as you’d like them to, are vital to the continuing development of both religion and literature in many cultures. Besides, who is to say that ghosts don’t exist? Just because something can be explained scientifically doesn’t rule out the possibility of supernatural intervention that happens to utilize natural laws.
Annie’s statement that the “old myths” spoken of by Frank were vital to the development of religion and literature in many cultures serves to:
Frank: I’m tired of hearing people talk about ghosts and disembodied spirits nowadays. Everyone knows that thousands of years ago these supernatural forces were given as explanations for phenomena which we could not explain. Now that we have a scientific explanation for these occurrences, there’s no reason to go back to the old myths.
Annie: These old myths, while they might not sound as logical as you’d like them to, are vital to the continuing development of both religion and literature in many cultures. Besides, who is to say that ghosts don’t exist? Just because something can be explained scientifically doesn’t rule out the possibility of supernatural intervention that happens to utilize natural laws.
Annie’s statement that the “old myths” spoken of by Frank were vital to the development of religion and literature in many cultures serves to:
Tap to see back →
Frank concludes that these “old myths” are antiquated, and implies that they are useless in light of modern scientific explanations. Annie’s statement does not dispute the scientific usefulness of the old myths, but rather provides an example of their usefulness on different grounds.
Frank concludes that these “old myths” are antiquated, and implies that they are useless in light of modern scientific explanations. Annie’s statement does not dispute the scientific usefulness of the old myths, but rather provides an example of their usefulness on different grounds.
Shopping in person is an activity that many people loathe. This accounts for the popularity of online shopping, which has few of the hassles of in-person shopping. Online shoppers are able to avoid lines, traffic, and having to hunt around the store for the items they need. With a few keystrokes and a credit card, they can accomplish a task in a few minutes that might have taken hours in "real life."
The claim that shopping in person is an activity that many people loathe plays which of the following roles in the argument?
Shopping in person is an activity that many people loathe. This accounts for the popularity of online shopping, which has few of the hassles of in-person shopping. Online shoppers are able to avoid lines, traffic, and having to hunt around the store for the items they need. With a few keystrokes and a credit card, they can accomplish a task in a few minutes that might have taken hours in "real life."
The claim that shopping in person is an activity that many people loathe plays which of the following roles in the argument?
Tap to see back →
This claim sets up the argument, which concludes that online shopping is popular precisely because many people loathe shopping in person. It is, therefore, a premise and not a conclusion, and is the reason for the conclusion. While it might feasibly be characterized as a generalization, that is not the role the claim plays in the argument.
This claim sets up the argument, which concludes that online shopping is popular precisely because many people loathe shopping in person. It is, therefore, a premise and not a conclusion, and is the reason for the conclusion. While it might feasibly be characterized as a generalization, that is not the role the claim plays in the argument.
James: Public schools should require students to wear uniforms. Studies have shown that both violence and bullying can be curtailed if such measures are taken.
Violet: I don't agree. Those same studies show that in schools where uniforms are required, there was still an average of 11.6 reported episodes of gang-related incidents and 8.4 reported bullying incidents per month. With those kinds of numbers, uniforms are clearly not worth the loss of student self-expression.
Violet responds to James' argument in which one of the following ways?
James: Public schools should require students to wear uniforms. Studies have shown that both violence and bullying can be curtailed if such measures are taken.
Violet: I don't agree. Those same studies show that in schools where uniforms are required, there was still an average of 11.6 reported episodes of gang-related incidents and 8.4 reported bullying incidents per month. With those kinds of numbers, uniforms are clearly not worth the loss of student self-expression.
Violet responds to James' argument in which one of the following ways?
Tap to see back →
Violet's primary disagreement with James is with his idea that "both violence and bullying can be curtailed" if uniforms are required at schools. She cites statistics showing that they will not be curtailed, thus disputing his premise. With that premise disregarded, she argues that his conclusion does not follow in light of the loss of student self-expression that wearing uniforms entails. The remaining answer choices do not correctly characterize Violet's response.
Violet's primary disagreement with James is with his idea that "both violence and bullying can be curtailed" if uniforms are required at schools. She cites statistics showing that they will not be curtailed, thus disputing his premise. With that premise disregarded, she argues that his conclusion does not follow in light of the loss of student self-expression that wearing uniforms entails. The remaining answer choices do not correctly characterize Violet's response.
Carlos: Beethoven is clearly the best of the Romantic era's composers. His melodies, diversity of genre, and innovations in musical form make him unsurpassed among composers of his time.
Susan: But Beethoven is best characterized as a Classical era composer. True, he did bring about the transition to Romanticism near the end of his career, but his styles and innovations were firmly rooted in the Classical period.
Susan responds to Carlos' argument by
Carlos: Beethoven is clearly the best of the Romantic era's composers. His melodies, diversity of genre, and innovations in musical form make him unsurpassed among composers of his time.
Susan: But Beethoven is best characterized as a Classical era composer. True, he did bring about the transition to Romanticism near the end of his career, but his styles and innovations were firmly rooted in the Classical period.
Susan responds to Carlos' argument by
Tap to see back →
Susan believes that Carlos' conclusion is erroneous solely because it makes an improper comparison: pitting a Classical era composer against Romantic era composers. Because she believes Carlos' categorization is improper, she dismisses his entire argument on that basis. Susan does not bring up any terminology differences; she merely argues that the "Romantic" label does not apply to Beethoven. Nor does she use an analogy, mention a factual dispute, or propose a compromise.
Susan believes that Carlos' conclusion is erroneous solely because it makes an improper comparison: pitting a Classical era composer against Romantic era composers. Because she believes Carlos' categorization is improper, she dismisses his entire argument on that basis. Susan does not bring up any terminology differences; she merely argues that the "Romantic" label does not apply to Beethoven. Nor does she use an analogy, mention a factual dispute, or propose a compromise.
A school teacher divides her class into three separate groups based on students' reading abilities. She thinks this will allow her best students to get ahead in reading, math, and science, while also allowing her weakest students to work with her best students and learn from them as well as herself.
The method of reasoning used by this teacher is best described as .
A school teacher divides her class into three separate groups based on students' reading abilities. She thinks this will allow her best students to get ahead in reading, math, and science, while also allowing her weakest students to work with her best students and learn from them as well as herself.
The method of reasoning used by this teacher is best described as .
Tap to see back →
The teacher has divided her class by skill level, but only in terms of reading ability. Yet, she still has these divisions set up to help the students improve in reading, math, and science. This means that the teacher believes learning ability in skills in one area translate to success in other areas.
The teacher has divided her class by skill level, but only in terms of reading ability. Yet, she still has these divisions set up to help the students improve in reading, math, and science. This means that the teacher believes learning ability in skills in one area translate to success in other areas.
The spread of viral diseases like Ebola is not just a medical problem, but an infrastructure problem. Building more roads and better sewage systems will allow a much easier path to fighting the disease for aid workers and medical professionals. Once the sick and dying can be more readily reached, the disease will be much more easily combatted.
The method of reasoning in this passage is best described as .
The spread of viral diseases like Ebola is not just a medical problem, but an infrastructure problem. Building more roads and better sewage systems will allow a much easier path to fighting the disease for aid workers and medical professionals. Once the sick and dying can be more readily reached, the disease will be much more easily combatted.
The method of reasoning in this passage is best described as .
Tap to see back →
The passage proposes that the serious problem of a terrible disease can be easily solved by the panacea of better infrastructure, which is then asserted to be easy to place in the countries fighting Ebola. One can articulate the passage's method of reasoning in saying that the passage views the solution to a problem as being found in a single action.
The passage proposes that the serious problem of a terrible disease can be easily solved by the panacea of better infrastructure, which is then asserted to be easy to place in the countries fighting Ebola. One can articulate the passage's method of reasoning in saying that the passage views the solution to a problem as being found in a single action.
Executive: The new software has outperformed its predecessor in first month sales. The upgrade to the interface is the most obvious change between the two versions. All software should now be outfitted with the same interface.
The best description of the executive’s reasoning is that .
Executive: The new software has outperformed its predecessor in first month sales. The upgrade to the interface is the most obvious change between the two versions. All software should now be outfitted with the same interface.
The best description of the executive’s reasoning is that .
Tap to see back →
The executive's reasoning is extremely straightforward and, in fact, rather crude. This does not make it easy to describe, however, and it is important to note that the executive directly links the new interface to the program's success in a large way. This indicates the executive sees the preceding event of the interface change as causing the software's success.
The executive's reasoning is extremely straightforward and, in fact, rather crude. This does not make it easy to describe, however, and it is important to note that the executive directly links the new interface to the program's success in a large way. This indicates the executive sees the preceding event of the interface change as causing the software's success.
Unlike his predecessors, the chairman of the board believed in seeking advice from the rest of the board. The company was able to address many of the difficult problems under the chairman’s leadership, particular with a raft of new issues stemming from external forces. Remarkably, the successful company became even more successful on his watch.
The method of reasoning used in the above statement is best expressed as .
Unlike his predecessors, the chairman of the board believed in seeking advice from the rest of the board. The company was able to address many of the difficult problems under the chairman’s leadership, particular with a raft of new issues stemming from external forces. Remarkably, the successful company became even more successful on his watch.
The method of reasoning used in the above statement is best expressed as .
Tap to see back →
The statement ends by remarking on the overall success of the business from a profit standpoint, which is the only value judgment given by the author and is pointed to directly as a result of the chairman's actions. While the strategy of talking to board members is mentioned, it is not remarked upon as inherently a positive or negative.
The statement ends by remarking on the overall success of the business from a profit standpoint, which is the only value judgment given by the author and is pointed to directly as a result of the chairman's actions. While the strategy of talking to board members is mentioned, it is not remarked upon as inherently a positive or negative.
Joey: We do not need to drink more water. We would only need to drink more water if we were dehydrated.
John: The fact that we are dehydrated is exactly why we need to drink more water.
John's response to Joey functions to:
Joey: We do not need to drink more water. We would only need to drink more water if we were dehydrated.
John: The fact that we are dehydrated is exactly why we need to drink more water.
John's response to Joey functions to:
Tap to see back →
John does not accept Joey's implicit premise/assumption, which is that they are not dehydrated. He then concludes, on the basis that Joey's premise of not being dehydratd is false, that in fact their dehydration means they should drink water.
John does not accept Joey's implicit premise/assumption, which is that they are not dehydrated. He then concludes, on the basis that Joey's premise of not being dehydratd is false, that in fact their dehydration means they should drink water.
Andrew: We regulate oil and gas, car exhaust, pesticides, and chemicals because, while companies argue that they are necessary for economic growth, they cause environmental pollution that can be harmful to health. Car alarms also cause environmental pollution in the form of loud noises, but we need cars (and alarms), so we should regulate them the way we do chemicals.
Alicia: Oil and gas, car exhaust, pesticides, and chemicals harm physical health, while car alarms are just annoying. We do not need to regulate them the same way.
Alicia's response to Andrew's argument can best be characterized as:
Andrew: We regulate oil and gas, car exhaust, pesticides, and chemicals because, while companies argue that they are necessary for economic growth, they cause environmental pollution that can be harmful to health. Car alarms also cause environmental pollution in the form of loud noises, but we need cars (and alarms), so we should regulate them the way we do chemicals.
Alicia: Oil and gas, car exhaust, pesticides, and chemicals harm physical health, while car alarms are just annoying. We do not need to regulate them the same way.
Alicia's response to Andrew's argument can best be characterized as:
Tap to see back →
Alicia is questioning Andrew's assertion that the type of harm that comes from car alarms (and justifies regulation in his argument) is similar to the harm that comes from chemical pollution.
Alicia is questioning Andrew's assertion that the type of harm that comes from car alarms (and justifies regulation in his argument) is similar to the harm that comes from chemical pollution.
The government is considering a new round of massive government spending. The opposition party has firmly come out against this new policy. They have argued that an expansion of government spending would both increase the debt and possibly cause inflation. In spite of these arguments, the government should adopt a new round of government spending. The economy remains below its optimal level of output and interest rates are at an all-time low. Only an increase in government spending can reduce the unemployment rate and get people back to work.
The argument proceeds by arguing that
The government is considering a new round of massive government spending. The opposition party has firmly come out against this new policy. They have argued that an expansion of government spending would both increase the debt and possibly cause inflation. In spite of these arguments, the government should adopt a new round of government spending. The economy remains below its optimal level of output and interest rates are at an all-time low. Only an increase in government spending can reduce the unemployment rate and get people back to work.
The argument proceeds by arguing that
Tap to see back →
We are looking for a premise that helps support the conclusion to answer this question. The stimulus has two premises that help support that the new round of government spending is a good idea; it will reduce the unemployment rate and it will get people back to work. The correct answer provides one of those premises.
We are looking for a premise that helps support the conclusion to answer this question. The stimulus has two premises that help support that the new round of government spending is a good idea; it will reduce the unemployment rate and it will get people back to work. The correct answer provides one of those premises.
Bill: Popular musicians today cannot find much success through the traditional routes. Since nearly all of their songs are now available for easy access on streaming web sites and services, they cannot hope to make money by selling albums. Now they must focus on live shows, and must increase the shows’ ticket prices if they hope to gain any profit.
Karen: Why do you think success should only be measured in terms of direct sales? Much of the job of musicians is to publicize themselves, and any exposure they can get is useful in the long run, even if initially they don’t receive immediate royalties. This was true even before the digital age.
Karen responds to Bill’s argument by
Bill: Popular musicians today cannot find much success through the traditional routes. Since nearly all of their songs are now available for easy access on streaming web sites and services, they cannot hope to make money by selling albums. Now they must focus on live shows, and must increase the shows’ ticket prices if they hope to gain any profit.
Karen: Why do you think success should only be measured in terms of direct sales? Much of the job of musicians is to publicize themselves, and any exposure they can get is useful in the long run, even if initially they don’t receive immediate royalties. This was true even before the digital age.
Karen responds to Bill’s argument by
Tap to see back →
Karen does not argue against Bill’s conclusion directly, but rather offers an alternate standard by which to evaluate the commercial “success” of musicians. Thus, Karen does not claim Bill’s reasoning is fallacious nor that any of his premises are incorrect; she merely reframes the argument by focusing on one of its key terms.
Karen does not argue against Bill’s conclusion directly, but rather offers an alternate standard by which to evaluate the commercial “success” of musicians. Thus, Karen does not claim Bill’s reasoning is fallacious nor that any of his premises are incorrect; she merely reframes the argument by focusing on one of its key terms.
A small shop has a policy that in order to sell fruit at the front of the store, it must be both organic and locally grown. Recently, a producer who has farmland slightly more than a quarter of a mile away wanted to have his persimmons sold at the store and showcased in the store’s large wooden display case. Upon receiving his request, the storeowners did a background check and determined that the farmer’s produce was in fact organic. Therefore, the storeowners allowed the farmer’s persimmons to be sold as he had requested.
The argument’s conclusion follows logically if which of the following is assumed to be true?
A small shop has a policy that in order to sell fruit at the front of the store, it must be both organic and locally grown. Recently, a producer who has farmland slightly more than a quarter of a mile away wanted to have his persimmons sold at the store and showcased in the store’s large wooden display case. Upon receiving his request, the storeowners did a background check and determined that the farmer’s produce was in fact organic. Therefore, the storeowners allowed the farmer’s persimmons to be sold as he had requested.
The argument’s conclusion follows logically if which of the following is assumed to be true?
Tap to see back →
The passage explains that the farmer’s persimmons are organic, and a reasonable inference can be made that they are also locally grown. Given that the passage states that “…therefore” the farmer may sell the persimmons in the shop, the argument will only logically flow if it is required that the farmer’s persimmons be both organic and locally grown. Given that these are the same prerequisites for selling the fruit at the front of the store, "Only fruit that would be allowed in the front of the store can be showcased in the store’s large wooden display case" is the correct answer. None of the other answer choices make it clear that it is required for the persimmons to be both organic and locally grown.
The passage explains that the farmer’s persimmons are organic, and a reasonable inference can be made that they are also locally grown. Given that the passage states that “…therefore” the farmer may sell the persimmons in the shop, the argument will only logically flow if it is required that the farmer’s persimmons be both organic and locally grown. Given that these are the same prerequisites for selling the fruit at the front of the store, "Only fruit that would be allowed in the front of the store can be showcased in the store’s large wooden display case" is the correct answer. None of the other answer choices make it clear that it is required for the persimmons to be both organic and locally grown.
Publisher: It is usually not a good idea for a first-time author to begin with a novel which the author intends to become part of a series. Most series novels are not published, but publishing companies are more likely to make series deals with authors who have previously published at least one stand-alone novel. If the stand-alone novel is a success, it is a good possibility that a subsequent series by that author will also be successful.
Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the publisher’s argument by the statement that most series novels are not published?
Publisher: It is usually not a good idea for a first-time author to begin with a novel which the author intends to become part of a series. Most series novels are not published, but publishing companies are more likely to make series deals with authors who have previously published at least one stand-alone novel. If the stand-alone novel is a success, it is a good possibility that a subsequent series by that author will also be successful.
Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the publisher’s argument by the statement that most series novels are not published?
Tap to see back →
While not vital to the argument, the claim that most series novels are not published is used to lead to the argument’s main premise, which is that publishing a stand-alone novel gives authors a better chance of later publishing a series. The statement does not weaken the argument, but rather puts it in context.
While not vital to the argument, the claim that most series novels are not published is used to lead to the argument’s main premise, which is that publishing a stand-alone novel gives authors a better chance of later publishing a series. The statement does not weaken the argument, but rather puts it in context.