PrepTest 113, Section 4, Question 7
Hazel: Faster and more accurate order processing would(67 more words not shown)
Hazel and Max disagree over(1 more words not shown)
- Aelectronic order processing(10 more words not shown)
- Bfaster and more(10 more words not shown)
- Cswitching to electronic(9 more words not shown)
- Dtheir business has(8 more words not shown)
- Eelectronic order processing(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Getting the order to everyone who needs it sounds useful. I can see Hazel's reason for wanting an electronic system. I'd still ask about the cost of changing systems and whether staff would need time to learn it. Faster processing could help while practical difficulties reduce the benefit.
Max raises a different concern: losing customers who want human interaction. But must electronic processing eliminate that interaction? Imagine calling a pizza restaurant and speaking to an employee who enters your order into a system that sends it to the kitchen. The order is processed electronically, and you still spoke to a person. That possibility makes me question Max's picture of the change.
What we’re looking for
We don't need to settle that question to identify the disagreement. Hazel recommends the switch to increase profits. Max says the switch would lose money. My prediction is simply whether adopting electronic order processing would benefit the business financially.
Working the answers
- A
Max doesn't say electronic processing is slower or less accurate. He could accept its speed and accuracy while worrying that losing customers would outweigh those benefits. His objection concerns the financial result of switching, not an explicit rejection of these features.
- B
This is close enough to deserve a pause. Hazel does say faster, more accurate processing would help. But Max's objection is to electronic processing as a whole. It doesn't follow that he thinks speed and accuracy themselves are financially unhelpful.
He could say, 'Yes, faster orders help us, but the customers we lose cost us even more.' Or he might not accept Hazel's description of the speed at all. Either way, we aren't given his rejection of the benefit B identifies. We need a statement both speakers actually take opposing positions on.
- CCorrect
This names the change they are evaluating, rather than separating out one attractive feature. Hazel predicts increased profits from switching to electronic processing. Max predicts a loss. That supplies the opposed views about whether the switch would be financially beneficial.
The difference between B and C is substantive. A feature can help while the overall decision hurts. C asks about the whole decision, which both speakers explicitly address.
- D
Wanting more profit doesn't establish a duty to be as profitable as possible. Neither speaker gives us a rule about the business's obligations, much less disagrees with the other about that rule. They debate the expected result of a proposed change.
- E
Max thinks customers will see the business this way. Hazel doesn't address that perception. She might disagree, but she could also accept it while thinking the benefits still outweigh any lost business. We shouldn't invent her view of the customers' feelings from her support for the switch.
More Disagreement questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Disagreement questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.