PrepTest 151, Section 4, Question 15
Columnist: Many car manufacturers trumpet their cars' fuel(40 more words not shown)
The reasoning in the columnist's(12 more words not shown)
- Adraws a conclusion(10 more words not shown)
- Bpresumes, without providing(11 more words not shown)
- Coverlooks the possibility(13 more words not shown)
- Dpresumes, without providing(15 more words not shown)
- Euses the term(6 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
How is the columnist driving those cars?
The advertised figures apply under normal driving conditions. The columnist's results might come from something different: unusually steep routes, constant hard braking and acceleration, or another feature of the way the cars are used. If that made the fuel economy worse, the advertised figures could be accurate for normal conditions while this driver repeatedly fell short.
What we’re looking for
Three disappointing experiences deserve a question, but they don't yet establish that manufacturers inflate their numbers. All three cars were used by the same person. My first objection is that this person's driving may not represent normal driving; for the flaw, look for an answer that questions how much the columnist can establish from that narrow experience.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The columnist uses three cars, all owned by one driver, to reach a broad conclusion about manufacturers' claims. That is a thin basis for the general accusation. The cars could have been used under unusual conditions or in an unusual manner shared across all three experiences. A identifies the limited sample behind the claim; it doesn't require proving that the columnist actually drove badly.
- B
The argument doesn't need driving conditions to be identical in every region. Conditions could vary widely while the columnist's own experience still counted as normal—or failed to. The relevant question is whether these three experiences justify the conclusion, not whether every region has the same roads, climate, and driving conditions.
- C
The columnist is explicitly questioning whether manufacturers' advertised figures are reliable. Suspecting that they inflate the numbers is hardly overlooking the possibility that their claims are biased. The problem is the evidence used to support that suspicion.
- D
Advertising a fuel-economy figure and meeting a minimum efficiency standard are different matters. A car could fall short of an advertised number while still meeting every applicable minimum. The passage doesn't introduce such a standard or claim that manufacturers knowingly violate one.
- E
Fuel economy has the same meaning throughout: how much driving the car gets from its fuel. The columnist compares the advertised performance with personal results; the argument doesn't change the term's meaning between those uses. Its weakness is the small amount of evidence for a broad accusation, not a shifting definition.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.