LSAT Logical Reasoning: Styrofoam Arguments
As you can imagine, being an LSAT teacher carries great risks. What used to be good old fights about doing the dishes are now fights about doing the dishes AND the assumptions underneath the statement “When you leave the dishes on the sink, it makes me feel like you’re an a@#$&@(#!”
But, enough about dishes we have to wash, let’s talk about disposable dishes! Yesterday I went and bought a shredded chicken burrito (half-and-half spicy/mild) at Santiago’s, my second favorite Mexican restaurant. I also picked up a frosty soda to wash it down (“pop” for Midwesterners). It arrived in a lovely Styrofoam cup. Later, while waiting in line (“on line” for New Yorkers), I satisfied my need to be constantly doing something (“ADHD” for you youngins) by reading the cup. I faced these two statements:
1. An average weight paper cold cup generates 148% more solid waste by weight than a comparable foam cup.
2. Polystyrene foam food service products constitute less than 1%, both by weight and volume, of landfill waste.
These messages seem to be supporting these conclusions, respectively:
1. It’s better to use a Styrofoam cup than a paper one.
2. It’s OK to use Styrofoam; it’s not that wasteful.
I couldn’t help but start to think of all the assumptions in these arguments. I brought the cup to class last night, and my students destroyed those arguments.
I challenge you, oh blogosphere members, to put in ye old comment box below as many assumptions as you can see. Be sure to say whether it’s for argument 1 or argument 2.
