LSAT 151 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q23

LR Question 23 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: A gram of the artificial sweetener aspartame is much sweeter …

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Parallel Reasoning

CONCLUSION: People who regularly drink soda with aspartame will start to prefer extremely sweet products.

REASONING: 1g of aspartame is much sweeter than 1g of sugar. Soft drinks with sugar are sweet, so those with aspartame are even sweeter.

ANALYSIS: 1g of a Carolina Reaper pepper (one of the spiciest in the world) is much spicier than 1g of your regular green pepper.

Foods with regular peppers are spicy, so foods with Carolina Reapers must be even spicier.

Well, that’s if you’re using the same amount of a Carolina Reaper as you would a normal pepper. But you probably wouldn’t do that, because that would be insane.

Same goes here. If aspartame is much sweeter, the drink might just use way less aspartame. So the final drink may not be sweeter than a sugar-sweetened drink at all.

The mistake is basically:

This ingredient is stronger per unit -> so the whole product must be stronger overall.

That only works if the same amount of each ingredient is used. But we’re never told that.

Look for the same pattern in the answer choices.

___________

1. This makes a different flaw. It concludes that something will always happen based on evidence that it sometimes happens.
2. Again, a different flaw. It assumes people spend more time reading because they own more books and books take longer. But they could just ignore the books they own.
3. CORRECT. One nickel is worth more than one penny, but Maria might have fewer nickels than Joe has pennies. Just like one gram of aspartame is sweeter than one gram of sugar, but the drink might contain much less aspartame.
4. Same as A and B – it’s a flawed argument, but not in the same way. It’s assuming that a preference is based on exposure without justification.
5. I work from home. My commute is from my bedroom to my office. That certainly doesn’t mean I have a delusion that everyone else’s commute is also abnormally short. It’s a horrible argument, but like the other wrong answers, it’s not the same flaw as the stimulus.