LSAT 140 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q11

LR Question 11 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: A science class stored one selection of various fruits…

QUESTION TYPE: Flawed Reasoning

CONCLUSION: The fruits tested stay fresh better in cooler temperatures.

REASONING: The class tested three temperatures. The coolest temperature worked best.

ANALYSIS: The class tested a very limited range of temperatures. They forget that temperatures can be much colder than 10 degrees.

Their conclusion is that colder is always better. That’s absurd – it would mean that fruits stay fresh the longest at absolute zero.

Maybe 10 degrees is the ideal temperature. Warmer is worse, but so is colder.

___________

1. The conclusion was only about the fruits tested, not all fruit. If you chose this, you need to be more precise about what conclusions say.
2. The argument didn’t say that coolness is the only factor that mattered. The conclusion said that cooler temperature leads to longer-lasting freshness. That kind of language doesn’t mean that all other factors are irrelevant.
   If I say “The more you study, the higher you’ll score on the LSAT”, it’s implied that I mean “….other things equal”. Obviously you’ll perform worse if you don’t sleep the night before the test in order to study eight extra hours.
3. CORRECT. The class only proved that, of the three temperatures, colder was better. But it’s possible that very cold temperatures would be worse. The class didn’t test -50 degrees.
4. The stimulus didn’t mention a thermometer. And we know from outside experience that thermometers are generally reliable enough to indicate that 10 degrees is cooler than 20 degrees. We can assume that if the class used a thermometer, then the thermometer fine, unless we’re given evidence to the contrary.
5. If I say “coolness helps preserve fruit” then that fact is my conclusion. I don’t need to explain it. An explanation of why it’s true could require 500 pages of plant biology.