Q4 - Among North American school-age

[samuelfbaron]

Hi,

I got the answer correct on this one, I just want to make sure that I understand the argument completely.

P: Strong positive correlation between obesity and amount of TV watched.

C: Arrival of interactive TV will make kids fatter.

(D), so we MUST assume that they will increase their TV watching. Is the important part of the assumption noting the 'strong positive correlation' ?

(A) Out of scope.
(B) Basically states a premise of the argument.
(C) Out of scope.
(E) Out of scope.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Nice expalantion of the argument samuelfbaron!

I might look at the answer choices though a little bit differently.

Incorrect Answers
(A) is too strong (among the most important causes).
(B) is a premise booster.
(C) strengthens the connection between the amount of tv watched and obesity, but is not necessary to the argument.
(D) is too specific (within a decade) and too strong (universally available).

There are many out of scope answers, but sometimes taking the time to see what sort of a loose connection there might be can help you identify and move past common traps used by the LSAT.

[WaltGrace1983]

Hi,

I got the answer correct on this one, I just want to make sure that I understand the argument completely.

P: Strong positive correlation between obesity and amount of TV watched.

C: Arrival of interactive TV will make kids fatter.

(D), so we MUST assume that they will increase their TV watching. Is the important part of the assumption noting the 'strong positive correlation' ?

(A) Out of scope.
(B) Basically states a premise of the argument.
(C) Out of scope.
(E) Out of scope.

Just want to point out very small (but perhaps on a different question, very significant) logical leap here. The argument is not necessarily that kids will become fatter. It seems to be saying that the number (or percentage) of children who are obese will increase - we aren't exactly sure which but we assume that it is talking about a raw number. This is important because there could totally be a great wrong answer for a strengthen question for instance saying something like, "Obese kids will gain weight when they watch interactive TV." However, this doesn't really matter because we are talking about the number of kids that will become obese. If obese kids merely get "fatter" then this really doesn't have any impact on the raw number of people becoming obese - maybe the same people who are obese now will be obese then but they will just be slightly more obese. You see what I am saying? Again, this is nitpicky and fairly inconsequential for this question but I have been noticing myself making unwarranted assumptions sometimes so I try to point out when I am about to make one so I can stop.

As for the others, I'll work my brain a bit more for my own development...

(A) This doesn't need to be true. We aren't concerned about the causes of obesity besides TV. If a causal answer choice doesn't relate "amount of TV watched" to "obesity" then we don't want it!

(B) Great strengthener - terrible NA. This shows that when one fad became more widely available then obesity increased. This strengthens (but isn't necessary) because we can relate "cable television" to "interactive television," showing that if this one fad (cable television) increased obesity than maybe this other fad (interactive television) will similarly increase obesity.

(C) Again, great strengthener - terrible NA. This is a causal argument coming from a correlation. (C) strengthens ever so slightly because it rules out a competing possibility: genetics. If genetics doesn't contribute to obesity then we have more reason to believe that watching TV does! It's not the best strengthener because it still doesn't show what impact interactive TV will have but it strengthens a bit.

(D) This is a cookie-cutter necessary assumption. If these children don't increase their TV viewing with interactive TV then we have no reason to believe that obesity will increase. Why? Because the argument says that more TV is correlated with more obesity and if ~(more TV) then we are seriously doubting that more obesity will ensue.

(E) It will strengthen a tiny bit if we assume that kids will still watch more interactive TV to begin with but we really don't need to assume that within a DECADE interactive TV will be UNIVERSALLY AVAILABLE.