Logical Reasoning

PT136 · S4 · Q4 Company spokesperson: Household

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Company spokesperson: Household Products magazine claims that our Filterator X water filter does not remove chemical contaminants in significant amounts.

Conclusion (implied rebuttal conclusion)

Filterer X water filter effectively removes chemical contaminants in significant amounts.

Evidence

Millions of Filterer X owners are satisfied with the product's performance.

Evaluate

We need to challenge the spokesperson's claim that the water filter effectively removes chemical contaminants based on owner satisfaction. We can do this by highlighting that consumer satisfaction isn't necessarily linked to the filter's actual ability to remove contaminants.

Goal

Find an answer choice that demonstrates why consumer satisfaction does not reliably indicate actual contaminant removal, thus weakening the argument made by the spokesperson.

4.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the company spokesperson's argument?

  1. Household Products did not evaluate

    No Impact

    Taste is irrelevant to the argument about removing chemical contaminants, so it doesn't weaken the claim about the filter's effectiveness.

    2% picked this

  2. Correct

    Most Filterator X owners have

    Why this is right

    This states that most owners have no way to determine how effective the product is at removing contaminants. It weakens the argument by undermining the reliability of consumer satisfaction as a measure of the filter's performance, suggesting they are satisfied without actual knowledge of the filter's effectiveness.

    Skill tested: Weaken · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    91% picked this

  3. People whose household water contains

    Strengthens

    This suggests that people with highly contaminated water are satisfied with the product, which could imply the filter is effective. Therefore, it strengthens rather than weakens the spokesperson's conclusion.

    3% picked this

  4. Very few people who own

    No Impact

    This notes that few owners read the magazine, which doesn’t affect the argument because it doesn't relate to the accuracy of consumer satisfaction as a measure of effectiveness.

    1% picked this

  5. Household Products' evaluations of Filterator

    No Impact

    This discusses the magazine's consistent negative evaluations, but it doesn't directly impact the spokesperson's claim that the filter is effective based on consumer satisfaction.

    3% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free