LSAT 138 – Section 4 – Question 15

LSAT 138 - Section 4 - Question 15

December 2012

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:23

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
PT138 S4 Q15
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Analogy +An
A
10%
160
B
77%
165
C
9%
157
D
4%
154
E
1%
154
142
151
161
 +Medium 146.393 +SubsectionMedium

Camille: Manufacturers of water-saving faucets exaggerate the amount of money such faucets can save. Because the faucets handle such a low volume of water, people using them often let the water run longer than they would otherwise.

Rebecca: It is true that showering now takes longer. Nevertheless, I have had lower water bills since I installed a water-saving faucet. Thus, it is not true that the manufacturers’ claims are exaggerated.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Rebecca concludes that manufacturers don’t overestimate how much money their faucets save users because she’s paid less on her water bills since she started using one of their faucets.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The problem here is that we still don’t know what the manufacturers’ claims were. In order to conclude that their claims are not exaggerated, Rebecca would need to prove that she’s saved as much as they claimed she would, but they may have claimed that their faucets save significantly more money than Rebecca’s have. Her water costs decreasing by an unspecified amount does not prove that the manufacturers gave accurate savings estimates.

A
the cost of installing her water-saving faucet was less than her overall savings on her water bill
It’s irrelevant how her overall savings compare to the installation cost. All that matters is how her savings compare to the manufacturer’s claims.
B
she saved as much on her water bills as the manufacturers’ claims suggested she would
This describes Rebecca’s failure to establish how her savings compare to the manufacturers’ claims. Her argument fails if she’s saved less than the manufacturers claimed she would.
C
the manufacturers’ claims about the savings expected from the installation of water-saving faucets are consistent with one another
Rebecca assumes nothing about how the manufacturers’ estimates compare to each other. She assumes that their claims are consistent with how much she saved.
D
people who use water-saving faucets are satisfied with the low volume of water handled by such faucets
Rebecca’s argument is only concerned with the accuracy of the manufacturer’s savings estimates, not whether customers are satisfied or not.
E
installing more water-saving faucets in her house would increase her savings
Rebecca doesn’t make any claim about what would hypothetically happen if she installed more faucets. She only claims that the manufacturers didn’t exaggerate.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 138 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply