- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Wed May 10, 2017 12:36 pm
#34684
Complete Question Explanation
Weaken—CE. The correct answer choice is (D)
This section opens with an argument describing the results of an experiment that tested the effect of chocolate on a person’s ability to taste coffee. Of ten people asked to taste and rank coffee samples, five were given chocolate with their coffee and five were not. The five who were given chocolate thought that the coffee samples tasted nearly identical to each other. However, the five who did not receive chocolate said there were differences in taste between the samples. From the evidence, the author concludes that “chocolate interferes with one’s ability to taste coffee.”
This is a causal argument, in which the chocolate is the cause, and the reduced ability to distinguish among coffee samples by taste is the effect. As with nearly any causal conclusion in the Logical Reasoning section of the LSAT, this causal conclusion is flawed. We simply do not have enough information to determine whether the chocolate in fact had this effect. We do not even know that the test subjects were given samples of the same type of coffee!
The question stem identifies this as a Weaken question. Rather than try to come up with a factual scenario that would attack this conclusion, keep your prephrase simple. The correct answer choice will directly impact the causal relationship, and will give us some reason to doubt that chocolate interferes with a person’s ability to taste coffee.
Answer choice (A): Although this answer choice displays a bit of LSAT humor—who would not rather be in the group that received chocolate!—it does not attack the conclusion. The bottom line of this answer choice is that the people were randomly assigned, which is not a fact that attacks the study’s results. Rather, this answer choice strengthens the conclusion by citing something positive about the study’s procedure, the random assignment of its subjects.
Answer choice (B): As with answer choice (A), this answer choice also strengthens the conclusion. If chocolate interferes with a person’s ability to taste coffee, then that interference would occur every time a person takes coffee with chocolate. The fact that a later study achieved similar results with a larger group of people only strengthens the argument’s conclusion.
Answer choice (C): Since we do not know what relevance this solid-liquid distinction has on taste, we cannot say what effect this answer choice has on the conclusion. Given the information provided in the stimulus, this information appears to be irrelevant.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice because it tells us that even when the chocolate was removed, the same people were unable to detect the differences between the coffee samples. This indicates that the cause may have something to do with the people or the coffee samples rather than the chocolate. In contrast with answer choice (B), which strengthened the conclusion by indicating regularity in the causal relationship described in the conclusion, this answer choice weakens the conclusion by indicating that the purported effect occurred even in the absence of the presumed cause.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice points to differences in the results among those test subjects who did not receive chocolate. This information has no effect on the conclusion, because it does nothing to strengthen or weaken the effect of chocolate on the ability to taste differences in coffee.
Weaken—CE. The correct answer choice is (D)
This section opens with an argument describing the results of an experiment that tested the effect of chocolate on a person’s ability to taste coffee. Of ten people asked to taste and rank coffee samples, five were given chocolate with their coffee and five were not. The five who were given chocolate thought that the coffee samples tasted nearly identical to each other. However, the five who did not receive chocolate said there were differences in taste between the samples. From the evidence, the author concludes that “chocolate interferes with one’s ability to taste coffee.”
This is a causal argument, in which the chocolate is the cause, and the reduced ability to distinguish among coffee samples by taste is the effect. As with nearly any causal conclusion in the Logical Reasoning section of the LSAT, this causal conclusion is flawed. We simply do not have enough information to determine whether the chocolate in fact had this effect. We do not even know that the test subjects were given samples of the same type of coffee!
The question stem identifies this as a Weaken question. Rather than try to come up with a factual scenario that would attack this conclusion, keep your prephrase simple. The correct answer choice will directly impact the causal relationship, and will give us some reason to doubt that chocolate interferes with a person’s ability to taste coffee.
Answer choice (A): Although this answer choice displays a bit of LSAT humor—who would not rather be in the group that received chocolate!—it does not attack the conclusion. The bottom line of this answer choice is that the people were randomly assigned, which is not a fact that attacks the study’s results. Rather, this answer choice strengthens the conclusion by citing something positive about the study’s procedure, the random assignment of its subjects.
Answer choice (B): As with answer choice (A), this answer choice also strengthens the conclusion. If chocolate interferes with a person’s ability to taste coffee, then that interference would occur every time a person takes coffee with chocolate. The fact that a later study achieved similar results with a larger group of people only strengthens the argument’s conclusion.
Answer choice (C): Since we do not know what relevance this solid-liquid distinction has on taste, we cannot say what effect this answer choice has on the conclusion. Given the information provided in the stimulus, this information appears to be irrelevant.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice because it tells us that even when the chocolate was removed, the same people were unable to detect the differences between the coffee samples. This indicates that the cause may have something to do with the people or the coffee samples rather than the chocolate. In contrast with answer choice (B), which strengthened the conclusion by indicating regularity in the causal relationship described in the conclusion, this answer choice weakens the conclusion by indicating that the purported effect occurred even in the absence of the presumed cause.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice points to differences in the results among those test subjects who did not receive chocolate. This information has no effect on the conclusion, because it does nothing to strengthen or weaken the effect of chocolate on the ability to taste differences in coffee.