Q11 - A science class stored

[smiller]

Question Type:
Flaw

Stimulus Breakdown:
Premises:
1. A class stored fruit at three different temperatures: 30, 20, and 10 degrees Celsius.
2. Fruit stored at a lower temperature stayed fresh longer than fruit stored at a higher temperature.

Conclusion:
The lower the temperature at which this fruit is stored, the longer it will stay fresh.

Answer Anticipation:
The class is drawing a general conclusion based on a limited number of examples. We don't know if the trend will continue at temperatures below 10 degrees.

Correct Answer:
(C)

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) This looks good… no, wait! It's contradicted. The test writers are trying to pull a fast one with this answer. The class is generalizing to temperatures it didn't test, not to fruits it didn't test. The conclusion specifically refers to storing "these varieties of fruits."

(B) This is contradicted. The premises state that all of the samples were stored under similar conditions.

(C) This is correct. The only evidence the class has is based on the temperatures it tested. The conclusion applies to any temperatures, not just the ones tested.

(D) This questions the truth of a premise. There are cases on the LSAT when you can legitimately question the source of information in a premise. Imagine if the premises stated something like, "according to a thermometer used to measure the temperature of the fruit, one selection of fruits was stored at 30 degrees Celsius..." In that case, there might be room to question the accuracy of the thermometer. However, that's not what we have in the stimulus. The premises state as fact that the fruits were stored at the three different temperatures. We have to accept this as accurate.

(E) This is not a flaw in this argument. It can be reasonable to conclude that something is true without explaining why it is true.

Takeaway/Pattern: It's easy to fall for an answer like (A) if you read that answer choice too quickly, or read the conclusion of the argument too quickly. Keep a balance between reading quickly and reading accurately.

#officialexplanation

[Jdanz653]

Decided to bring this question to the forum since there wasn't an explanation. So this question is a flaw question and we are told that a science class stores similar types of fruits in different temperatures (30, 20, 10). And they found that the cooler the temperature was the longer the vegetables stayed fresh so they concluded that these particular vegetables stayed fresher longer in cooler temperatures. Off the bat I was somewhat unsure of the flaw but went into the answer choices anyways with a clear understanding of the study.

A) basically says that they generalized from the fruits they tested to some they did not. This is not true. They explicitly state that their conclusion applied to the fruits they tested. Eliminate.

B) states that other factors besides temperature could have played a role, such as humidity. This is not what is occurring. The stimulus says that all temperatures had similar conditions, essentially controlling for other factors. Eliminate.

C) states that they extrapolated from a narrow range of temperatures to the whole range. At this point I realized what they flaw was. Technically, the only thing that can be concluded from this study is that within this particular range of temperatures, vegetables stay fresher longer in cooler temperature. However, this does not necessarily imply this is the case for the entire range of temperatures. It could be the case that for some reason 50 degrees is ideal for these vegetables.

D) questions the reliability of the thermometer. This seems like this is basically attacking the premises, not the argument as a whole.

E) basically states that it's flawed because no explanation was given as to why the vegetables stayed fresher in cooler temperatures. But this isn't even a flaw, at least I dont think so. For example, someone could conclude that every day the sun will set, yet have no idea exactly why this is the case. Their conclusion would still stand regardless of whether or not they know the exact mechanisms underlying the sunset.

If anyone notices anything wrong with my reasoning, feedback would be appreciated!

[raj.gmat2015]

Guys,

Could please explain why A is wrong.

We had 3 selection of fruits and from that the author concluded that the cooler the temperature the longer the freshness. Are we not generalizing here i.e from a sample we are talking about the broader universe of fruits.

What am I missing here?

Thanks,
Raj

[ohthatpatrick]

The original poster actually nailed it. This conclusion does NOT generalize to OTHER fruits.

It says "the class concluded that the cooler the temp at which these varieties of fruit are stored, the longer the freshness."

If they tested bananas, apples, and kiwis, it is true to say they are assuming the conclusion is true for OTHER examples of bananas, apples, and kiwis.

But the conclusion is ONLY making a claim about the types of fruit tested.

[andrewgong01]

It seems pretty "unfair" C was the credited response because the range (10 - 30 degrees) seems like a pretty big range , especially when it is in Celsius.

More than that, even if we were to say it was not a wide enough range, it is hard to imagine how the ideal temperature of storing something is not a monotonically decreasing/increasing function so the question stem does seem to give a fair generalisation.

To me it seems like the logic of the flaw is saying whatever temperature we do not test we can not conclude but, in real life, we rarely ever test all temperature ranges ; instead we predict the result based of our observations of a few and draw statistical analysis on it. And in this case since the results were decreasing across the range the conclusion seems to be fairly drawing a conclusion

[ohthatpatrick]

Yeah, I see what you're saying.

This is a pretty sensible conclusion. Although, if we kept with common sense, what happens when we go lower than 10 degrees?

Would 5 degrees keep them fresh even longer?
Probably.

Would 0 degrees keep them fresh even longer? (Well what happens at 0 degrees Celsius?)

Maybe freezing fruit, in which its liquids go through a phase change into solid, is not as good a way at preserving "FRESH" fruit as would be super-cool but not freezing temps.

There is such a thing as frost damage / freezer burn ... not sure what either of those are, but it's possible that there's a sweet spot when it comes to preserving the freshness of fruit.

Try this Inference question from test 52
https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/foru ... -t928.html

Same concept with answer choice (A).

Whenever you see, "the more X, the more/less Y" type wordings, it's a VERY extreme claim, because you are assuming a monotonic type function.

We have probably all heard studies that show WITHIN A CERTAIN RANGE, "more wealth = more happiness", but that curve has a point of diminishing returns, and at a certain point it's not true anymore that more wealth has ANY effect on more happiness.

I see your point that molecular motion seems more apt to having a smooth quantitative property than the complex relationship between money and happiness, but basically LSAT wants us to be wary of "the more X, the more Y" type formulation.