PrepTest 103, Section 1, Question 3
The number of calories in a gram of(52 more words not shown)
The reasoning in the argument(5 more words not shown)
- Afails to consider(13 more words not shown)
- Bpresupposes that all(8 more words not shown)
- Cconfuses one kind(4 more words not shown)
- Dpresupposes what it(19 more words not shown)
- Eoverlooks the possibility(13 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
How much sugar are we comparing? Equal calories per gram wouldn't help if the candy contained far more grams of sugar.
But the conclusion handles that: it specifies equal amounts of the two sugars. So the sugar contributes the same number of calories in both foods. We can accept that part.
What about everything else in the candy?
A piece of candy could also contain fat or other ingredients that add calories. Matching the sugar doesn't mean we've matched the whole food. Imagine the sugar contributes 40 calories to each item, but the candy has another 50 calories from other ingredients and the fruit has another 10. Equal sugar calories, different totals.
What we’re looking for
The flaw question asks us to describe that overlooked possibility. The author has compared one ingredient and acted as though that settles the calorie count of the entire candy and the entire piece of fruit.
Working the answers
- A
Noncaloric nutrients don't add calories. They might matter if we were comparing nutritional value, but the conclusion is specifically about calorie totals. The missing consideration is another source of calories, not another reason to prefer fruit.
- B
The argument doesn't need all candy to contain similar amounts of sugar. It's comparing a piece of candy with a piece of fruit containing an equal amount of the relevant sugar. Other candy could contain much more or much less sugar without changing that particular comparison.
- C
The author recognizes that cane sugar and fructose are different kinds of sugar. The premise simply says they have the same calories per gram. Two different things can share a property; that isn't a confusion between them.
- D
The premise compares calories in the sugars. The conclusion compares calories in the complete foods. Those are different claims, so the argument isn't just assuming the conclusion. The gap between the ingredient and the whole food is precisely what we need to explain.
- ECorrect
Sugar may not account for every calorie in either food. To compare the totals, we would also have to account for calories from the other ingredients. Those could make the candy higher in calories even when its sugar contributes exactly as many calories as the fruit's sugar. That doesn't mean the totals must differ; it means the given evidence doesn't establish that the candy's total cannot be higher.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.