For this one we are given two pieces of information:
1) In a blender whip cream is whipped ineffectively and it's ineffective because of poor air intake.
2) A whipping cream attachment helps with this but it still has poor air intake issues.
In MBT you can either have an answer choice that's an inference from sentences in stimulus, a repeat of one of the premises, or a general summary of the stimulus.
With this stimulus my eyes were immediately drawn to the last sentence. The whipping cream attachment has poor air intake issues and I know from my first sentence that a whip cream is ineffectively whipped if air intake is poor. The way the last sentence is structured you have to be able to connect what that sentence is telling you with information given in the first sentence.
But I didn't just look for this answer choice because I cannot guarantee thats what the LSAT writers will do. So I just keep an open mind and head into answer choices.
A) We know if whip cream is velvety it is ineffectively whipped. But we can't say that every time whip cream is ineffectively whipped it will be velvety. This is a classic cookie cutter trap answer choices where they flip sufficient and necessary.
B ) This talks about the inference we saw earlier. If poor intake then whip cream is ineffectively whipped. And if the attachment has poor air intake then its ineffective.
C) We know that whip cream attachment helps "somewhat" but we have no idea how its actually helps. We can't say its more fluffy. Even if we give in and say that helping somewhat would mean fluffier, the "somewhat" could be limited to certain instances and may not happen every time.
D) "reducing the total amount of air required" is not what the stimulus actually says happens. According to the stimulus it just has poor air intake, does not mean that amount is reduced.
Comments
Edited title and added link to explanation so people can help you out better!
Thank you dillon!!
For this one we are given two pieces of information:
1) In a blender whip cream is whipped ineffectively and it's ineffective because of poor air intake.
2) A whipping cream attachment helps with this but it still has poor air intake issues.
In MBT you can either have an answer choice that's an inference from sentences in stimulus, a repeat of one of the premises, or a general summary of the stimulus.
With this stimulus my eyes were immediately drawn to the last sentence. The whipping cream attachment has poor air intake issues and I know from my first sentence that a whip cream is ineffectively whipped if air intake is poor. The way the last sentence is structured you have to be able to connect what that sentence is telling you with information given in the first sentence.
But I didn't just look for this answer choice because I cannot guarantee thats what the LSAT writers will do. So I just keep an open mind and head into answer choices.
A) We know if whip cream is velvety it is ineffectively whipped. But we can't say that every time whip cream is ineffectively whipped it will be velvety. This is a classic cookie cutter trap answer choices where they flip sufficient and necessary.
B ) This talks about the inference we saw earlier. If poor intake then whip cream is ineffectively whipped. And if the attachment has poor air intake then its ineffective.
C) We know that whip cream attachment helps "somewhat" but we have no idea how its actually helps. We can't say its more fluffy. Even if we give in and say that helping somewhat would mean fluffier, the "somewhat" could be limited to certain instances and may not happen every time.
D) "reducing the total amount of air required" is not what the stimulus actually says happens. According to the stimulus it just has poor air intake, does not mean that amount is reduced.
E) "The most common way" is not relevant here.
Thanks @Sami !! Yeah after looking at this with fresh eyes. I saw that B was clearly correct