Some cleaning fluids, synthetic carpets, wall paneling, and other products release toxins, such as formaldehyde and b...
ShannonOh22July 30, 2019
Between D and E...
It seems E is more supported by the passage than D is. Reasoning = the passage says nothing about "poor ventilation" - it says only that toxins in the air are "not a problem in well-ventilated houses". Are we to assume a house must have "poor ventilation" as the only alternative to a house that is "well-ventilated"? What about "adequately-ventilated", or just "ventilated" houses?
E, on the other hand, can very easily be defended by the passage. It is broad enough to cover the general implication that if you have houseplants in your home, there will be at least some reduction in the air toxins than if you do not have houseplants.
Can you please explain this further? I am finding it easier to defend E than D, and this is definitely a question I would have missed if it were on the LSAT I took.
Thanks!
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Some products release toxins into the household air supply. Not a problem in well-ventilated houses, but a problem in houses that are so well-insulated that they trap toxins and heat. Houseplants remove some toxins from the air and eliminate their danger.
The conclusion that would follow logically is that it is beneficial to have houseplants in a well-insulated house. Given limited facts that are presented in the premise, we have to be careful to limit our inference to the information in the premise. It tells us that plants can eliminate some household toxins and thus compensate for some of the negative effects of poor ventilation, but we have no further details regarding the plants' impact on heat or specific toxics or the precise amounts of toxins removed. I understand your reluctance to equate poor ventilation with a well-insulated house in (D), but it appears that poor ventilation is implied in the premise when the author discusses "well-insulated" houses in contrast to "well-ventilated houses"." As you correctly pointed out, there are other alternatives to a "well-ventilated" house, but none of them would provide as strong of a contrast to a well-ventilated house and its associated toxin concerns.
(E) is incorrect because we have insufficient evidence to make this inference. The passage tells that toxins are not a problem in well-ventilated houses though we do not know if it means there are zero toxins or their level is low enough not to present any danger. It also tells us that toxins are a problem in a well-insulted house but plants can remove SOME of them, suggesting that some toxins may remain but again we cannot exactly quantify how many and especially what this level is in relation to a well-ventilated house. If I had to draw an inference here, I would be more inclined to say that the air in a well-ventilated house will contain fewer toxins that in a well-insulated one with plants, but the opposite is definitely not supported by the passage.
