Recording executive: Many musicians resent Web sites that allow people to copy music free of charge. The musicians argue, among...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Mock

Critical Reasoning

Misc.

HARD

...

Notes

Post a Query

Recording executive: Many musicians resent Web sites that allow people to copy music free of charge. The musicians argue, among other things, that each person who chooses to copy a song from such a Web site represents less profit for the song's creator. However, by providing free publicity for the musician, the widespread copying of a song over the Internet appears to increase record sales. There is a strong correlation between increases in the popularity of a song on music-copying Web sites and increases in sales of the album containing that song.

The recording executive's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

It overlooks the possibility that two correlated phenomena stem independently from some third factor and that neither causes the other.

It fails to adequately address the possibility that even if a phenomenon causes a certain effect in some instances, it may have the opposite effect in other instances.

It takes for granted that if a practice increases overall record sales, then musicians have no legitimate reason to resent that practice.

It requires the assumption, for which no support is provided, that significant sales of an album containing a song seldom occur before that song becomes popular on music-copying Web sites.

It overlooks the possibility that most of the songs in albums that are purchased have not previously been copied by the purchasers from any music-copying Web site.

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage	Analysis
Many musicians resent Web sites that allow people to copy music free of charge.	What it says: Musicians don't like websites where people can download music for free What it does: Sets up the musicians' side of the debate about free music copying What it is: Background context establishing the conflict
The musicians argue, among other things, that each person who chooses to copy a song from such a Web site represents less profit for the song's creator.	What it says: Musicians believe every free download means they lose money What it does: Explains the reasoning behind musicians' resentment from the previous statement What it is: Musicians' argument/reasoning Visualization: 100 people copy song for free → musician loses potential profit from 100 sales
However, by providing free publicity for the musician, the widespread copying of a song over the Internet appears to increase record sales.	What it says: Free copying actually seems to boost album sales by acting as advertising What it does: Challenges the musicians' argument with an opposing viewpoint What it is: Recording executive's counter-argument Visualization: Song copied 1000 times for free → acts as publicity → album sales increase by 200 copies
There is a strong correlation between increases in the popularity of a song on music-copying Web sites and increases in sales of the album containing that song.	What it says: When songs get popular on free sites, album sales go up too What it does: Provides evidence to support the claim that free copying helps sales What it is: Supporting evidence/data Visualization: Song popularity on free sites: 50% increase → Album sales: 30% increase

Argument Flow:

The executive starts by acknowledging musicians' concerns about lost profits from free music copying, then counters with the claim that free copying actually helps sales by providing publicity, and backs this up with correlation data showing that popular songs on free sites lead to higher album sales.

Main Conclusion:

Free music copying on websites actually increases record sales rather than hurting profits, contrary to what musicians believe.

Logical Structure:

The argument uses correlation evidence (songs popular on free sites correlate with higher album sales) to support the theory that free copying acts as publicity, which challenges the musicians' assumption that each free copy represents lost profit.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Misc - This is a flaw/vulnerability question asking us to identify the weakest point in the recording executive's reasoning

Precision of Claims

The executive claims there's a 'strong correlation' between song popularity on free sites and album sales increases, but uses this to argue that free copying 'appears to increase' record sales

Strategy

We need to find logical flaws in how the executive uses the correlation data to counter the musicians' argument. The key vulnerability is likely in how correlation is being interpreted or what alternative explanations aren't being considered

Answer Choices Explained

It overlooks the possibility that two correlated phenomena stem independently from some third factor and that neither causes the other.

This correctly identifies the core flaw in the executive's reasoning. The argument treats correlation as causation without considering alternative explanations. When we see that song popularity on free sites correlates with album sales, there could be a third factor (like marketing campaigns, radio play, or the song's quality) causing both phenomena independently. The executive assumes the free copying causes the sales increase, but correlation alone doesn't prove causation.

It fails to adequately address the possibility that even if a phenomenon causes a certain effect in some instances, it may have the opposite effect in other instances.

This suggests the argument fails to address that free copying might sometimes hurt sales and sometimes help sales. However, the executive's argument doesn't claim that free copying always helps in every single instance - it makes a general claim based on the correlation pattern observed. The argument's main flaw isn't about varying effects in different instances.

It takes for granted that if a practice increases overall record sales, then musicians have no legitimate reason to resent that practice.

This mischaracterizes what the executive concludes. The executive doesn't argue that musicians have 'no legitimate reason to resent' the practice. The executive simply counters the musicians' economic argument by suggesting free copying actually helps sales. The executive doesn't address whether resentment is justified or not.

It requires the assumption, for which no support is provided, that significant sales of an album containing a song seldom occur before that song becomes popular on music-copying Web sites.

The argument doesn't require this assumption at all. The executive never claims that songs must become popular on free sites before significant album sales occur. The argument is about correlation between popularity on free sites and sales increases, not about timing or which comes first.

It overlooks the possibility that most of the songs in albums that are purchased have not previously been copied by the purchasers from any music-copying Web site.

This doesn't identify a flaw in the reasoning. Whether purchasers had previously copied the songs or not doesn't affect the correlation between site popularity and sales increases that the executive uses as evidence. This possibility doesn't weaken the executive's core argument about the correlation data.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...