Deirdre: Many philosophers have argued that the goal of

Question

Deirdre: Many philosophers have argued that the goal of every individual is to achieve happiness—that is, the satisfaction derived from fully living up to one’s potential. They have also claimed that happiness is elusive and can be achieved only after years of sustained effort. But these philosophers have been unduly pessimistic, since they have clearly exaggerated the difficulty of being happy. Simply walking along the seashore on a sunny afternoon causes many people to experience feelings of happiness.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a reasoning flaw in Deirdre’s argument?

(A) It dismisses a claim because of its source rather than because of its content. 
(B) It fails to take into account that what brings someone happiness at one moment may not bring that person happiness at another time.
(C) It allows the key term “happiness” to shift in meaning illicitly in the course of the argument. 
(D) It presumes, without providing justification, that happiness is, in fact, the goal of life. 
(E) It makes a generalization based on the testimony of a group whose views have not been shown to be representative.

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

Let us simplify the argument given --

PHILOSOPHERS' ARGUMENT --
 Goal of an individual = Achieve happiness (= joy from living up to one's potential) + This happiness can be achieved only through years of sustained effort

AUTHOR'S ARGUMENT --
 Walking on a seashore on sunny afternoon --> feelings of happiness --> Philosophers have exaggerated the difficulty of being happy --> their view is pessimistic

Note that this directly attacks the second part of the philosophers' argument -- "can be achieved only through years of effort" -- by giving an example.

We have been asked to find a flaw in the argument -- some kind of inconsistency that the author did not account for.

By comparing the two arguments, we can see that happiness in the author's argument = feeling of contentment BUT happiness in philosophers' argument = joy from living up to one's potential. Two very different things.

Which answer option states this? Option C.

Let us take a look at other answer options --

Option A - Incorrect 
No. the author does not dismiss the philosophers' claim because it came from philosophers (=source).

Option B - Incorrect 
This is probably not true. The author clearly states that it is momentary (experience on sunny afternoons, not at other times). 
Moreover, this does not point a flaw in the author's reasoning --

Walking on a seashore on sunny afternoon --> feelings of happiness --> Philosophers have exaggerated the difficulty of being happy

This does not depend on whether the happiness is temporary or permanent. Only thing that matters is it can be achieved in a short amount of time and thus philosophers are wrong.
 
Option D - Incorrect 
This pertains to the philosophers' argument. Not relevant.
 
Option E - Incorrect 
"testimony of a group whose views have not been shown to be representative." -- no testimony is offered. No group is talked about. Also, we cannot infer anything about the representativeness of the group.

ruchik · Answer

Is there any official explanation provided for this question.

nightblade354 · Answer

ruchik , MGMAT's LSAT Forum: https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/foru ... t2218.html Powerscore Forum: https://forum.powerscore.com/lsat/viewtopic.php?t=11718 Let me know if you have any other questions

dave13 · Answer

Time taken 2 min. 55 sec

Deirdre: Many philosophers have argued that the goal of every individual is to achieve happiness—that is, the satisfaction derived from fully living up to one’s potential. They have also claimed that happiness is elusive and can be achieved only after years of sustained effort. But these philosophers have been unduly pessimistic, since they have clearly exaggerated the difficulty of being happy. Simply walking along the seashore on a sunny afternoon causes many people to experience feelings of happiness.

Deirdre, says that many philosophers claim that it takes many efforts to achieve a a desired level of happiness, but those philosophers exagerrate the difficulty level to beome happy. E.g walking along seashore can make a person happy.

(ok here one can note a shift in the term "happiness": one guy says it takes efforts to achieve happiness; another one says it can be experienced effortlessly, in other words "happiness" is interepreted differently by Deirdre)

So, what is the reasoning flaw in Deirdre’s argument ?

Which one of the following most accurately describes a reasoning flaw in Deirdre’s argument?

(A) It dismisses a claim because of its source rather than because of its content.   ( No, it doesnt dismiss the claim of its source. Deidre didnt critisize philosophers, he just claimed it can be experienced effortlessly)

(B) It fails to take into account that what brings someone happiness at one moment may not bring that person happiness at another time. ( This cant be assumed. It is not mentioned. What are not concerned with types of happiness. we are concerned with level of difficulty at which THAT happiness implied by philosophers, is achieved)
 
 (C) It allows the key term “happiness” to shift in meaning illicitly in the course of the argument. (so, this is in line with my reasoning )

(D) It presumes, without providing justification, that happiness is, in fact, the goal of life.  (out of scope. Goal of life -not mentioned)

(E) It makes a generalization based on the testimony of a group whose views have not been shown to be representative.  (it doesnt make any generalization of any group. FALSE)

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Deirdre: Many philosophers have argued that the goal of

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

Deirdre: Many philosophers have argued that the goal of

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