LSAT Flashcards
Critics of the bakery's extended room temperature proof predict that room temperature proofing will always produce less consistent rise than a controlled proofing cabinet. In response, the bakery points to its rise measurement records, where room temperature proofed panettone has consistently matched target height more often than cabinet proofed panettone from competitors.
A. The response counters the critics' prediction by citing empirical rise measurement evidence that room temperature proofed panettone actually matches target height more often than cabinet proofed panettone, matching this evidence-based reasoning precisely.
B. The response concedes the critics' prediction while arguing it does not matter for other reasons.
C. The response identifies an internal contradiction in the critics' claim.
D. The response disputes the critics' claim without offering any alternative evidence.
E. The response proposes an entirely unrelated proofing policy.
Rationale
Method of Reasoning. The response counters the critics' prediction, that room temperature proofing always produces less consistent rise, by citing actual rise measurements showing room temperature proofed panettone matching target height more often than cabinet proofed competitors. This is empirical counter evidence from existing practice, matching (A) precisely. Wrong: (B) is not attempted; no concession is made. (C) mischaracterizes the response as identifying a contradiction rather than citing specific empirical evidence. (D) is incorrect since the response does offer rise measurement evidence. (E) is not attempted; no unrelated policy is proposed.
Use arrow keys to navigate and space to flip.
