Camille: Manufacturers of water-saving faucets exaggerate the amount of money such faucets can save. Because the fau...

Derek on August 28, 2014

Why Not C

I understand after reviewing the question that the answer could be B but I am still having a difficult time understanding why not C? Rebecca's conclusion is that the ""manufacturers' "" claims are not exaggerated. If she is stating that she saved money on her bill and that this is showing that the manufacturers' claims are true, then wouldn't she be assuming that all the water saving faucet manufacturers' claims are constituent with each other?

5 Replies

Melody on September 10, 2014

Camille states manufacturers of water-saving faucets exaggerate the amount of money such faucets can save.

Rebecca disagrees. Her reasoning is that despite the fact that her showering now takes longer that it did with her old faucet, she has had lower water bills since she installed a water-saving faucet.

However, just because she is saving money, does not mean that she is saving AS MUCH money as the manufacturers claimed that she could. This is Camille's exact point. Camille isn't saying that the manufacturers claim is that one will not save any money when switching to a water-saving faucet, merely that the amount the manufacturers' claim is possible to save is exaggerated.

Answer choice (B) states: "she saved as much on her water bills as the manufacturers' claims suggested she would."

This is correct. Rebecca takes for granted that she saved as much on her water bills as the manufacturers' claims suggested she would. Though she saved money, that does not mean that she saved as much as they had said she would, i.e. the manufacturers could have been exaggerating on how much she could expect to save. So the reasoning in Rebecca's argument is questionable because she takes answer choice (B) for granted.

Answer choice (C) states: "the manufacturers' claims about the savings expected from the installation of water-saving faucets are consistent with one another."

Though it may be true that Rebecca is taking for granted that the manufacturers' claims about the savings expected are consistent with one another, that doesn't address the flaw. We want to find the answer choice that Rebecca takes for granted which addresses why Rebecca's reasoning is questionable.

Rebecca's reasoning is not questionable because of answer choice (C). Similarly, Rebecca does not address the color of the water-saving faucets. But, just because she takes this for granted, it does not mean that it describes our flaw.

Hope that clears things up! Please let us know if you have any other questions.

on September 4 at 01:45PM

I think my previous understanding of "take for granted" must be incorrect as it pertains to the lsat can you explain how I should read it to mean as the writers intend? Thank you so much

on September 4 at 01:45PM

That particular phrase is frequently causing me problems.

on September 13 at 03:07AM

I second that ^^ could you please explain a bit more what the phrase "takes for granted" means as it pertains to the LSAT? I know I've read it before on another thread, but I can't remember

armando on October 10 at 08:33PM

I have had that same issue during my current marathon review. What has helped me understand the secondary meaning of the "takes for granted", which usually is assumes or overlooks, and my head just substitutes the term. This has helped me, I am not sure if it's fully correct but saves me time by not double guessing and looking if "taken for granted" is being used according to our modern everyday use.