LSAT 140 – Section 3 – Question 12

LSAT 140 - Section 3 - Question 12

December 2013

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 0:45

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT140 S3 Q12
+LR
Main conclusion or main point +MC
A
93%
165
B
1%
151
C
1%
153
D
2%
157
E
3%
155
129
138
148
 +Easier 149.74 +SubsectionMedium

Video of JY doing this

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Consumer advocate: Even if one can of fruit or vegetables weighs more than another, the heavier can does not necessarily contain more food. Canned fruits and vegetables are typically packed in water, which can make up more than half the total weight of the can’s contents. And nothing stops unscrupulous canning companies from including more water per can than others include.

Summarize Argument
Heavier cans of fruit or vegetables from different companies may not actually contain more food. Some cans might have less food despite being heavier because the fruits and vegetables are packed in water, which can make up more than half the weight. Since some canning companies might add more water than others, heavier cans might not contain more food.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the consumer advocate’s warning that heavier cans of fruit or vegetables may not actually contain more food.

A
The heavier of two cans of fruit or vegetables does not necessarily contain more food than the lighter of the two cans contains.
This accurately states the consumer advocate's main conclusion. Since packing companies can add more water to their cans, a heavier can of fruit or vegetables doesn’t always have more food than a lighter one. The heavier can might just have much more water than the lighter can.
B
The weight of the water in a can of fruit or vegetables can be more than half the total weight of the can’s contents.
This is a premise. The statement that water can make up more than half the weight of a can of fruit or vegetables helps readers understand the consumer advocate's conclusion that heavier cans don't always contain more food—they might just have more water.
C
Nothing stops unscrupulous canning companies from including more water per can than others include.
This is a premise. The claim that "nothing stops unscrupulous canning companies from including more water per can" supports the consumer advocate's conclusion that heavier cans do not always contain more food. The extra weight could just be from more water, not more food.
D
Some canning companies include less food in cans of a given weight than others include.
This is a necessary assumption of the consumer advocate’s argument. The advocate assumes that some canning companies might add more water and, therefore, less food to their cans. If this assumption is true, then a heavier can could have less food than another can of the same weight.
E
The heavier of two cans of fruits or vegetables may include more water than the lighter of the two cans contains.
This is a necessary assumption of the consumer advocate’s argument. The argument relies on the assumption that a heavier can may include more water—and therefore less food—than a lighter can. If this is true, then a heavier can doesn’t necessarily contain more food.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 140 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply