Government official: Clearly, censorship exists if we, as citizens, ar

Question

Government official: Clearly, censorship exists if we, as citizens, are not allowed to communicate what we are ready to communicate at our own expense or if other citizens are not permitted access to our communications at their own expense. Public unwillingness to provide funds for certain kinds of scientific, scholarly, or artistic activities cannot, therefore, be described as censorship.

The flawed reasoning in the government official's argument is most parallel to that in which one of the following?

(A) All actions that cause unnecessary harm to others are unjust: so if a just action causes harm to others, that action must be necessary.

(B) Since there is more to good manners than simply using polite forms of address, it is not possible to say on first meeting a person whether or not that person has good manners.

(C) Acrophobia, usually defined as a morbid fear of heights, can also mean a morbid fear of sharp objects. Since both fears have the same origin.

(D) There is no doubt that a deed is heroic if the doer risks his or her own life to benefit another person. Thus an action is not heroic if only thing it endangers is the reputation of the doer.

(E) Perception of beauty in an object is determined by past and present influences on the mind of the beholder. Thus on object can be called beautiful, since not everyone will see beauty in it.

Source: LSAT

Can someone pour in with explanation as mentioned below:

A-> B NOT B -> NOT A

here Public willing (not allowed) => Censorship (Premise)
 Public unwilling => Not Censorship.

How above cause effect can be structured inA/B form as explained above

Plz pour in thoughts

pqhai · Accepted Answer

Hi TGC

I’m happy to help.

GENERAL THEORIES

This is a parallel reasoning question, but it's more like a  flaw of reasoning  question, so it’s important to find the fallacy first. If you can’t realize the flaw of reasoning in the stimulus, it’s difficult to pick a correct choice.

This question uses a fallacy, namely,   Denying the Antecedent.  
  The form is:  
 If A, then B
Conclusion: If Not A, then Not B. 
 Note: The logic is WRONG.

For example: 
If I have 800 GMAT score, I will be accepted at Harvard Business School.
Conclusion: If I don’t have 800 GMAT score, I will NOT be accepted at HBS.
It’s wrong. Even though 800 is exceptional score. If one has 800 GMAT, HBS will accept him. However, 800 GMAT is not the ONLY condition to decide an applicant is accepted or not.

APPLY TO THE QUESTION:

If    ,  then   censorship exists.
 Conclusion:   if  public is unwillingness to provide funds for XYZ,  then  censorship does NOT exist.

KEY word is “unwillingness”  which means people  are ALLOWED  to provide funds,  but not willing  to do so. I will paraphrase the conclusion like:
Paraphrased version of conclusion: If public  is ALLOWED  to provide funds for XYZ, then censorship does  NOT exist .

This is an alternate version of “Denying the Antecedent”.
Form used in this question is: 
If A is negative (not allowed to...), then B positive (censorship exists).
Conclusion: If A is positive (is allowed to....), then B negative (censorship does not exist). .
This is a  wrong  logic.

Only D has a parallel reasoning.

Let examine D:

(D) There is no doubt that a deed is heroic if the doer risks his or her own life to benefit another person. Thus an action is not heroic if only thing it endangers is the reputation of the doer.

The form of D is: 
If doer  risks  his or her own life, then a deed is  heroic .
Thus, if doer does  not risk  his or her own life (the doer only risks his or her reputation), then an action is  not a heroic .

Clearly, the conclusion in D has a similar fallacy as we discussed above. Hence, D is the answer.

Hope it helps.

amgelcer · Answer

First, sorry about my English, I am still learning.

I am not sure if my reasoning is 100% correct, but I got the right answer, so, it might help.

Clearly, censorship exists if we,  as citizens , are not allowed to communicate what we are ready to communicate at our  own expense  or if other  citizens  are not permitted access to our communications at their  own expense .

For me, the most parallel argument not only should have the "A-> B NOT B -> NOT A", but also should have "something that depends on the person".
The (D) is the only option with this kind of stuff.

(D) There is no doubt that a deed is heroic if the doer risks  his or her own  life to benefit another person. Thus an action is not heroic if only thing it endangers is the reputation of the doer.

Regards.

-------------
Did I help you? How about +KUDOS for me?

BillyZ · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION FROM POWERSCORE  
Complete Question Explanation

Parallel Flaw. The correct answer choice is (D)
The stimulus contains flawed reasoning in the form of a mistaken negation.

Citizens Allowed to Communicate  
..... OR ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... →..... Censorship
 Citizens Permitted Access

Therefore,

Citizens Allowed to Communicate 
..... AND ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... → ..... Censorship
Citizens Permitted Access 
(if the public itself is unwilling to provide funds)

Since we are seeking an answer which parallels this reasoning, we should look for the choice that contains a mistaken negation.

Answer choice (A): This is not the correct answer since it is a proper contrapositive:

Actions that cause Unnecessary Harm ..... → ..... Just Action

Therefore,

Just Action ..... → ..... Actions that cause Unnecessary Harm

If a just action causes harm, then, it must be necessary since just actions never cause unnecessary harm. This is a valid reasoning, and is not the correct answer.

Answer choice (B): This answer choice does not contain a mistaken negation. The conclusion also does not match that of the stimulus.

Answer choice (C): This choice does not contain a mistaken negation. The conclusion also does not match that of the stimulus.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. It is a mistaken negation which parallels that found in the stimulus.

Doer Risks Life to Benefit Another ..... → ..... Heroic

Therefore,

Doer Risks Life to Benefit Another (if the only thing the doer risks is his reputation) ..... → ..... Heroic

It contains a mistaken negation just as the stimulus does.

Answer choice (E): This answer choice doe not reflect a mistaken negation.

soumya2504 · Answer

I got it wrong but I analyzed and realized that:

here Public willing (not allowed) => Censorship (Premise)
Public unwilling => Not Censorship

Doer risks life => Deed heroic
Doer doesn't risk life (only risks reputation) => Deed NOT heroic

So, D is the correct answer

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Government official: Clearly, censorship exists if we, as citizens, ar

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Government official: Clearly, censorship exists if we, as citizens, ar

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards