Sixty adults were asked to keep a diary of their meals, including what they consumed, when, and in the company of how...
BK8February 21, 2020
Why is D incorrect
I understand that D and E do not necessarily support the argument, but I do not see how D has anything to do with caloric intake? If I go to a dinner that is prepared perfectly and the food looks great but I do not like the food, there is no reason to assume that I would eat more of it. It seems that D forces us to make an assumption that does not apply to an infinite number of potential scenarios.
Please let me know if I am missing something here.
Thank you
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
It's great that you're wary of making assumptions, as this is an important concept on the LSAT. However, in this question we are asked to eliminate the answers that could possibly contribute to an explanation. This means that the answers we eliminate would be helpful, but may not be ideal (i.e. could require us to make some assumptions).
To understand this, let's compare (D) to (A). We do not necessarily know that a longer meal means people will eat more, but it is reasonable enough to be possible. This is true for (D) as well. We do not necessarily know that a more attractive meal means people will eat more, but it is reasonable enough to be possible. Therefore, (D) "contributes to an explanation." This is different than (E), which does not provide any reasonable basis that we could connect to the paradox.
Does that make sense? Please let us know if you have any other questions!
