Question of LR question #22 - PT30

[hopefor170]

How is the answer not A?

- Section 2 BTW

[DearCan]

Honestly, I'm curious too. I chose D. The answer is E, yet I don't see how this answer could possibly be TCR. The people that write these questions are smarter than I can comprehend if there is a good explanation for this somewhat bullshit answer.

[Atlas LSAT Teacher]

Yeah, it's a tricky one.

The facts are that there were two groups. Group A added 25% more calories in the form of alcohol, while Group B kept their caloric intake the same, but replaced 25% of their intake from something like bread with alcohol. Surprisingly (at least to me), both groups gained weight - and the same amount. (Wouldn't you expect group A to gain more - remember the beer gut you grew in college?)

We're looking for something that is most strongly supported - an inference that might have a bit of wiggle room. (D) is strongly supported since the weight that the people gained doesn't seem to be about the calories consumed, since if it did, Group A would surely have gained more weight than Group B, since Group A increased their overall intake. It might be that it's because of the type of food that affects weight gain instead of the number of calories, but (D) sidesteps this issue by simply saying that the fat gain is "not dependent solely..." It doesn't commit to stating what the weight gain does depend on.

(A) is out of scope - we don't know the implications of a faster metabolization.
(B) is too broad - the primary cause?
(C) discusses the link between fat and weight, which is not at issue here.
(E) is very tempting, however it's actually contradicted by the facts. Group A, who added on alcohol calories, only added 20% to their diet (think about it, if someone eats 4000 calories per day and adds 25% more in the form of alcohol, he's adding 1000, which is 20% of the new total of 5000). Group B, had a higher proportion in alcohol calories (25% pure and simple) and it was not more significant, since that group gained the same amount of weight as Group A

[DearCan]

Yeah, it's a tricky one.

The facts are that there were two groups. Group A added 25% more calories in the form of alcohol, while Group B kept their caloric intake the same, but replaced 25% of their intake from something like bread with alcohol. Surprisingly (at least to me), both groups gained weight - and the same amount. (Wouldn't you expect group A to gain more - remember the beer gut you grew in college?)

We're looking for something that is most strongly supported - an inference that might have a bit of wiggle room. (D) is strongly supported since the weight that the people gained doesn't seem to be about the calories consumed, since if it did, Group A would surely have gained more weight than Group B, since Group A increased their overall intake. It might be that it's because of the type of food that affects weight gain instead of the number of calories, but (D) sidesteps this issue by simply saying that the fat gain is "not dependent solely..." It doesn't commit to stating what the weight gain does depend on.

(A) is out of scope - we don't know the implications of a faster metabolization.
(B) is too broad - the primary cause?
(C) discusses the link between fat and weight, which is not at issue here.
(E) is very tempting, however it's actually contradicted by the facts. Group A, who added on alcohol calories, only added 20% to their diet (think about it, if someone eats 4000 calories per day and adds 25% more in the form of alcohol, he's adding 1000, which is 20% of the new total of 5000). Group B, had a higher proportion in alcohol calories (25% pure and simple) and it was not more significant, since that group gained the same amount of weight as Group A

Thank you for the help, but this isn't the question we're curious about. It's question 22 in PT 30 Section 2. The rattlesnake question. It sounds like you could really shed some light on this for us, so thank you for the help in advance!

[Atlas LSAT Teacher]

That's a classic! We use to that to teach the difference between necessary and sufficient assumptions. Here's a write-up: http://www.atlaslsat.com/forums/post2603.html#p2603

[DearCan]

That's a classic! We use to that to teach the difference between necessary and sufficient assumptions. Here's a write-up: http://www.atlaslsat.com/forums/post2603.html#p2603

That was shockingly helpful. Thanks for the link!

[hijodehombre]

Very helpful. This is where Kaplan's notion of "scope" fails, imo.

[Atlas LSAT Teacher]

Awesome. Glad to help. Not sure if it'd be your cup of tea, but if you're looking for a final push/review of some questions that have stumped you, there's a free public class on 10/4 - http://www.atlaslsat.com/EventShow.cfm? ... ventID=381

Good luck!