PT 59/Section 2/Question 22

ReadingNation
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:22 pm

PT 59/Section 2/Question 22

Postby ReadingNation » Fri Jun 04, 2010 5:41 pm

O'k ... this is a long thread ... but anyone who can bear through with it and help me I would appreciate it : )

I just tried tackling this question on my own and I cannot bring it to a definitive end ...

My concern relates to PT 59/Section 2/Question22 ... so here it is ... How do you determine which answer choice is more qualified to strengthen the conclusion when both of the a.c's can be equally weakened?

For example, assume 22 C) is true ... During the month before the study, workers at Plant A and Plant B were equally productive ... This does not necessarily strengthened the argument because you can still state "O'k, I'll grant you that the month prior to the study workers at Plant A and Plant B were equally productive. However, though the workers at Plant B did not receive a free nutritious breakfast during the study, they nevertheless eat a nutritious breakfast” thereby creating a scenario where 22 C) actually weakens the study

1)Workers at Plant B were as equally productive as workers at Plant A a month before the study

2)Workers at Plant B eat a nutritious breakfast whereas their counterparts receive(and presumably eat) a free nutritious breakfast

3)When workers eat a nutritious breakfast, workers become more productive

4)Yet Workers at Plant A increased their productivity during the month whereas the productivity for workers at Plant B remained the same during that month, even though both eat a nutritious breakfast

Now let’s attack A) with the same gusto …

Let’s assume A) is true … ostensibly, if A is true it should strengthen the argument … so it’s an undeniable fact that few workers in Plant B consumed nutritious breakfasts during the month of the study … yet I could make the case that in some cases A) is irrelevant, and hence does not strengthen the argument just like I made the case that in some scenarios 22 C) does not only not strengthen the argument, but can actually weaken it …

So in what scenarios is A) irrelevant … what about if the workers in Plant B were already as productive as they could be … that they have already reached their ceiling respective to their potential productivity … in this scenario whether a few or a lot of workers for Plant B consumed a nutritious breakfast would not matter because the breakfast would not be able to change the fact that the workers at Plant B had already maxed out their potential productivity …

So there … I said what I needed to say … Honestly, when I hit the a.c.’s I was looking for something that confirmed that workers at Plant A had not only received a nutritious breakfast but that they actually eat it … after I had read A-E and didn’t find what I was looking for, I settled on A) and C) as my two best answer choices … so, if someone can explain to me why they picked A) over C) while taking into account what I have mentioned I would greatly appreciate it : ) …

User avatar
zworykin
Posts: 449
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 4:18 am

Re: PT 59/Section 2/Question 22

Postby zworykin » Fri Jun 04, 2010 6:10 pm

You're just trying to strengthen the argument, not prove it conclusively.

If the workers at A are provided a nutritional breakfast it's pretty safe to assume most of them actually eat it. Workers at B, on the other hand, rarely eat one. Workers at A improved; workers at B did not. Therefore, the breakfasts helped.

Seems pretty reasonable.

Answer B doesn't strengthen the argument; it presents an alternative explanation.
Answer C is irrelevant; the argument doesn't care about the two groups' relative productivity before the study began, only how much they did or did not improve.
Answer D doesn't strengthen the argument; it presents an alternative explanation.
Answer E is irrelevant for the same reason as answer C; we're looking for degree of improvement, not productivity relative to the other group.

The only option that could provide support for the argument "breakfast helped their productivity" is, in fact, the only one that mentions breakfast at all. Even if we don't assume that most of the workers at A eat their free breakfast, the other 4 options still couldn't possibly help the argument.

RTFM
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:45 pm

Re: PT 59/Section 2/Question 22

Postby RTFM » Fri Jun 04, 2010 9:57 pm

I also narrowed it down to A and C. This was my thinking during the test:

The conclusion is "nutritious breakfasts make workers more productive," but it doesn't say anything about those breakfasts having to be provided at work. So after I read the whole stimulus, I thought, "How do we know it was the breakfasts that make them more productive? What if workers in Plant B were also eating nutritious breakfasts at home?" And since that was the question I asked myself before looking at the answer choices, I picked A.

So in what scenarios is A) irrelevant … what about if the workers in Plant B were already as productive as they could be … that they have already reached their ceiling respective to their potential productivity … in this scenario whether a few or a lot of workers for Plant B consumed a nutritious breakfast would not matter because the breakfast would not be able to change the fact that the workers at Plant B had already maxed out their potential productivity …


This wouldn't make A irrelevant at all. It would still show that eating healthy breakfast-->increase productivity, and not eating a healthy breakfast doesn't lead to increased productivity (doesn't matter where that productivity starts).

JJDancer
Posts: 1564
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:41 pm

Re: PT 59/Section 2/Question 22

Postby JJDancer » Sun Oct 03, 2010 6:42 pm

I was confused between A and C too.

I guess I didn't understand what "few workers" meant. Is there some universally accepted LSAT definition for what few is? For example if there were 5 workers total in plant B and a few (2-3) are nutritious breakfasts then they should have shown an increase in productivity too...

I felt like the word few threw me off because while reading the stimulus I did wonder
1) do the plant A workers EAT the free meals?
2) what if plant B workers ate nutritious breakfasts on their own?

Question 2:
Let's say the stimulus was the same except the last sentence read "plant A workers productivity increased more than did plant B's"
--> would that make it matter whether they were equally productive the month before -- or would C not matter at all in this situation either?

Thanks in advance!

JJDancer
Posts: 1564
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:41 pm

Re: PT 59/Section 2/Question 22

Postby JJDancer » Sun Oct 03, 2010 7:51 pm

bump

User avatar
yzero1
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu May 27, 2010 4:33 pm

Re: PT 59/Section 2/Question 22

Postby yzero1 » Sun Oct 03, 2010 8:06 pm

JJDancer wrote:I was confused between A and C too.

I guess I didn't understand what "few workers" meant. Is there some universally accepted LSAT definition for what few is? For example if there were 5 workers total in plant B and a few (2-3) are nutritious breakfasts then they should have shown an increase in productivity too...

I felt like the word few threw me off because while reading the stimulus I did wonder
1) do the plant A workers EAT the free meals?
2) what if plant B workers ate nutritious breakfasts on their own?

Question 2:
Let's say the stimulus was the same except the last sentence read "plant A workers productivity increased more than did plant B's"
--> would that make it matter whether they were equally productive the month before -- or would C not matter at all in this situation either?

Thanks in advance!


I can give a partial explanation to your question about the word "few" because it caused me to make a mistake on a previous PT as well. When the words "A FEW" appear on the LSAT, the meaning is equivalent to "SOME" which is also equivalent to "MANY". However, if the wording is only "FEW", that basically means "NOT MANY" which translates to "MOST DO NOT".

JJDancer
Posts: 1564
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 7:41 pm

Re: PT 59/Section 2/Question 22

Postby JJDancer » Sun Oct 03, 2010 9:34 pm

JJDancer wrote:I was confused between A and C too.
Question 2:
Let's say the stimulus was the same except the last sentence read "plant A workers productivity increased more than did plant B's"
--> would that make it matter whether they were equally productive the month before -- or would C not matter at all in this situation either?

Thanks in advance!

Thanks yzero.

Anyone able to answer the second part of my ques?




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: #gobroncos, Baidu [Spider], bigv, BobBoblaw, BOSStongrl, Instrumental, lagavulinjoe, LarryFlint, Mq666, mrgstephe and 16 guests