LSAT Explanation PT 33, S1, Q2: Sheila: It has been argued that

LSAT Question Stem

Sheila's argument uses which one of the following techniques of argumentation? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Method of Reasoning question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is A. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

In this passage, Sheila presents an argument about the process of adding color to black-and-white films. Her main conclusion is that colorizing a film does not damage the integrity of the original black-and-white film. We can label this as the conclusion of the argument.

Sheila supports her conclusion by drawing an analogy between colorizing films and adapting written works (novels or short stories) into movies. She points out that no one argues against creating movie adaptations of written works, as it is considered a new work that stands on its own and does not affect the value of the original. This part of her argument can be considered a premise.

To make this more understandable, let's use a simple example. Imagine you have a classic painting in black and white, and someone decides to create a new version by adding color to it. This new version does not damage the original painting's integrity because it is a separate artwork that can be judged on its own merit. This is similar to what Sheila argues about colorizing films.

Now, let's discuss the question type and the answer choices. The question is a Method of Reasoning (MOR) question, asking us to identify the technique Sheila uses in her argument.

(a) It appeals to an analogy between similar cases.

This answer choice is correct because Sheila's argument relies on drawing an analogy between colorizing films and adapting written works into movies.

(b) It offers a counterexample to a general principle.

This answer choice is incorrect because Sheila's argument does not provide a counterexample to a general principle. Instead, she uses an analogy to support her conclusion.

(c) It appeals to popular opinion on the matter at issue.

This answer choice is incorrect because Sheila's argument does not rely on popular opinion. Her argument is based on the analogy between colorizing films and adapting written works into movies.

(d) It distinguishes facts from value judgments.

This answer choice is incorrect because Sheila's argument does not focus on distinguishing facts from value judgments. Instead, she uses an analogy to support her conclusion.

(e) It draws an inference from a general principle and a set of facts.

This answer choice is incorrect because Sheila's argument does not involve drawing an inference from a general principle and a set of facts. Her argument is based on the analogy between colorizing films and adapting written works into movies.

In conclusion, the correct answer choice is (a) It appeals to an analogy between similar cases, as Sheila's argument relies on drawing an analogy between colorizing films and adapting written works into movies to support her conclusion that colorizing films does not damage the integrity of the original black-and-white film.