LSAT 124 – Section 1 – Question 10

LSAT 124 - Section 1 - Question 10

December 2007

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:04

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
PT124 S1 Q10
+LR
Strengthen +Streng
A
0%
152
B
0%
155
C
0%
158
D
95%
164
E
4%
159
120
121
136
 +Easiest 146.495 +SubsectionMedium

Public health experts have waged a long-standing educational campaign to get people to eat more vegetables, which are known to help prevent cancer. Unfortunately, the campaign has had little impact on people’s diets. The reason is probably that many people simply dislike the taste of most vegetables. Thus, the campaign would probably be more effective if it included information on ways to make vegetables more appetizing.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis

The author hypothesizes that the campaign to increase vegetable intake would have been more successful if it discussed how to make vegetables taste better. This is based on the phenomenon that the campaign was ineffective, which led the author to the sub-conclusion that its ineffectiveness was because people don’t like how vegetables taste.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes causation from correlation. Specifically, the author assumes that there isn’t another reason why the campaign was ineffective—maybe it was underfunded or poorly planned, and its ineffectiveness was not because people don’t like the taste of vegetables.

A
The campaign to get people to eat more vegetables has had little impact on the diets of most people who love the taste of vegetables.

This does not affect the argument. We already know that the campaign had little impact on all people’s diets, including those who like vegetables. The author argues that it would be more successful if it targeted those who don’t like the taste of vegetables effectively.

B
Some ways of making vegetables more appetizing diminish vegetables’ ability to help prevent cancer.

This does not affect the argument. The campaign could just advertise the ways of making vegetables more appetizing that do not diminish their ability to help prevent cancer. “Some” could just mean that one method of preparation diminishes vegetables’ cancer-preventing abilities.

C
People who find a few vegetables appetizing typically do not eat substantially more vegetables than do people who dislike the taste of most vegetables.

This does not affect the argument. There is no reason to suggest that liking a few vegetables would make you eat substantially more vegetables than someone who doesn’t like most vegetables.

D
People who dislike the taste of most vegetables would eat many more vegetables if they knew how to make them more appetizing.

This strengthens the argument. It provides evidence to believe that including information on how to make vegetables appetizing in the campaign would increase its effectiveness, as people would eat many more vegetables.

E
The only way to make the campaign to get people to eat more vegetables more effective would be to ensure that anyone who at present dislikes the taste of certain vegetables learns to find those vegetables appetizing.

This weakens the argument by offering a very specific circumstance under which the campaign’s effectiveness would increase. The author doesn’t argue that vegetables must be appetizing, only that they should be made more appetizing (e.g., from horrible tasting to a little bad).

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 124 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply