QUESTION TEXT: Maté is a beverage found in much of South…
QUESTION TYPE: Strengthen
CONCLUSION: Maté probably originated in Paraguay.
REASONING: Maté is used more widely in Paraguay than elsewhere, and there are more varieties of it there too.
ANALYSIS: This isn’t a very good argument. To strengthen it, we can say that Maté probably originated in the area where it has the most varieties or where it is used more widely.
___________
- In use “for a very long time” isn’t the right comparison. We want to find where Maté originated.
- Who cares what Paraguayans believe? We want to know what’s true, not what’s popularly believed. Belief can’t establish fact.
- The argument doesn’t say that the best maté shows where maté originated. Also, this answer is only about belief, not fact.
- This doesn’t help us prove which place in South America maté originated. Much of South America drinks maté.
- CORRECT. This supports the argument. Maté is more widely used in Paraguay than anywhere else. So this answer suggests that maté may have originated in Paraguay.
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
MemberGabrielle L says
I understand Lucas’ reasoning in the comments, but I think the description of answer A on the page should be adjusted. It seems like both A and E are using points about length of time as an indicator of origination, so the explanation of A seems flawed. Pointing out the difference in relative vs absolute terms would be more helpful. Thanks!
FounderGraeme Blake says
Maybe I can clarify the distinction in A. Suppose I prove you’ve been using coffee for a very long time.
Is that the same thing as saying you invented coffee? Absolutely not.
A is using the completely wrong concept. Absolute and relative is also a helpful way of thinking about it but I think it is necessary to point out that A used the completely wrong idea.
Long time vs originated are completely different ideas, even though they are similar.
Jack says
I see how E could be the correct answer, but I am failing to see why it is better than A. Both answers only state that the implication of (A) a great variety of a type of a beverage or (E) the wider use of a beverage is that the beverage has been used there for a very long time, so why does E necessarily strengthen the argument more than A?
TutorLucas (LSAT Hacks) says
There’s one hard-to-catch distinction between (E) and (A) that make (E) the correct answer. (E) is speaking in relative terms — the longer a beverage has been in use, the more widely that beverage is used there. We know that mate is used more widely in Paraguay than anywhere else, so by (E)’s logic we can say that it has (likely) been in use longer than anywhere else.
(A) is speaking in absolute terms — by (A)’s logic, we could say that mate has likely has been in use for a very long time in Paraguay, but it doesn’t allow us to compare the amount of time it’s been in use in Paraguay to that same value in other countries. Sure, maybe Paraguay has more varieties than anywhere else, but maybe the number of varieties elsewhere is still “great”, so mate can also be said to have been in use there for a very long time by (A)’s logic.
Memberhiyer1@gmail.com says
very difficult distinction to catch.
TutorLucas (LSAT Hacks) says
Agreed. I think this one’s clear enough though, that we can’t say LSAC is splitting hairs.
Karl says
LSAC most definitely split hairs on this one.