PrepTest 155, Section 4, Question 1
A company produced a small car that costs(27 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(13 more words not shown)
- AThe company surveyed(16 more words not shown)
- BThe company could(11 more words not shown)
- CMost people who(16 more words not shown)
- DMany households that(10 more words not shown)
- EMost people who(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Less safe than other cars, but safer than what these buyers were using before? Those are two different comparisons.
The new car is cheap, and it is less safe than any car previously available. Accept that. But we aren't told that its buyers traded in other cars. What if they had been riding motorcycles or bicycles? The new car could be a poor choice compared with another car and still be a safety upgrade for those people.
What we’re looking for
That would explain the apparent conflict. When the question asks us to resolve the paradox, we need a reason these customers became safer after buying the car. We don't need to explain why the company built a cheap car or why customers wanted one. Our prediction concerns the customers' previous way of getting around.
Working the answers
- A
This explains why a company might choose to make an inexpensive, less safe car: its potential customers care more about price. But their priorities don't explain their improved safety. People could put price first and end up either safer or less safe than before.
- B
The company could improve the car. Has it done so? This answer doesn't say it has, and the passage already tells us that the car these customers bought is less safe than other cars. A possible future improvement doesn't explain why buying the current version made them safer.
- C
Being unaware of the danger might explain the decision to buy. It doesn't explain the result of that decision. The question says these customers actually increased their safety, not merely that they believed they were safer. Their lack of information doesn't change the car's safety.
- D
Being able to afford two cars instead of one tells us about household purchasing power. It doesn't tell us how the new car compares with the transportation its buyers previously used. We still need an explanation for the improvement in safety.
- ECorrect
This is the comparison we wanted. Most buyers previously used bicycles or motorcycles, and those were less safe than the new car. Moving from one of those vehicles to this car makes a person safer, even though moving from another car to this one would not. The car can be unusually dangerous for a car while still protecting its buyers better than their previous transportation did.
More Paradox questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Paradox questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.