"Consumer advocate: it is generally true, at least in this state, that lawyers who advertise a specific service charge less for that service than lawyers who do not advertise. It is also true that each time restrictions on the advertising of legal services have been eliminated, the number of lawyers advertising their services has increased and legal costs to consumers have declined in consequence. However, eliminating the state requirement that legal advertisements must specify fees for specific services would almost certainly increase rather than further reduce consumer's legal costs. Lawyers would no longer have an incentive to lower their fees when they begin advertising and if no longer required to specify fee arrangements, many lawyers who now advertise would increase their fees.
In the consumer advocate's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first is a generalization that the consumer advocate accepts as true; the second is presented as a consequence that follows from the truth of that generalization.
(B) The first is a pattern of cause and effect that the consumer advocate argues will be repeated in the case at issue; the second acknowledges a circumstance in which that pattern would not hold.
(C) The first is pattern of cause and effect that the consumer advocate predicts will not hold in the case at issue; the second offers a consideration in support of that prediction.
(D) The first is evidence that the consumer advocate offers in support of a certain prediction; the second is that prediction.
(E) The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the main position that the consumer advocate defends; the second is that position.
Looking for an expert to explain this one!
TIA,
GK
In the consumer advocate's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first is a generalization that the consumer advocate accepts as true; the second is presented as a consequence that follows from the truth of that generalization.
(B) The first is a pattern of cause and effect that the consumer advocate argues will be repeated in the case at issue; the second acknowledges a circumstance in which that pattern would not hold.
(C) The first is pattern of cause and effect that the consumer advocate predicts will not hold in the case at issue; the second offers a consideration in support of that prediction.
(D) The first is evidence that the consumer advocate offers in support of a certain prediction; the second is that prediction.
(E) The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the main position that the consumer advocate defends; the second is that position.
Looking for an expert to explain this one!
TIA,
GK
