LSAT 103 – Section 1 – Question 03

LSAT 103 - Section 1 - Question 03

September 1998

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:59

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
PT103 S1 Q03
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
A
1%
156
B
1%
151
C
1%
153
D
1%
153
E
95%
165
132
140
147
 +Easier 147.884 +SubsectionMedium

The number of calories in a gram of refined cane sugar is the same as in an equal amount of fructose, the natural sugar found in fruits and vegetables. Therefore, a piece of candy made with a given amount of refined cane sugar is no higher in calories than a piece of fruit that contains an equal amount of fructose.

Summarize Argument
The argument’s conclusion is that a piece of candy made with X grams of cane sugar has no more calories than a piece of fruit containing X grams of fructose. This is based on the claim that cane sugar and fructose have the same amount of calories per gram.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The argument’s conclusion is about an overall property of candy and fruit, based on evidence about only one ingredient of candy and one component of fruit. In other words, the argument ignores the possibility that candy could have other ingredients that make it higher in calories than fruit, even though cane sugar and fructose have equivalent calorie counts.

A
fails to consider the possibility that fruit might contain noncaloric nutrients that candy does not contain
Whatever noncaloric nutrients fruit or candy contain, that’s irrelevant to this argument, which is only about calorie counts.
B
presupposes that all candy is made with similar amounts of sugar
The argument is limited to the hypothetical situation of a piece of candy and a piece of fruit with the same amount of sugar. It’s irrelevant whether real candies are made with varying amounts of sugar.
C
confuses one kind of sugar with another
The argument clearly distinguishes cane sugar and fructose, and never confuses them.
D
presupposes what it sets out to establish, that fruit does not differ from sugar-based candy in the number of calories each contains
The argument doesn’t presuppose its conclusion, but instead supports it with evidence about the caloric density of different sugars.
E
overlooks the possibility that sugar might not be the only calorie-containing ingredient in candy or fruit
The argument comes to a conclusion about the relative calories of candy and fruit based on evidence only about the types of sugar each one contains. However, if candy or fruit have other calorie-containing ingredients, the conclusion is thrown into question.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 103 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply