LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 8919
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#35168
Complete Question Explanation

Resolve the Paradox. The correct answer choice is (C)

Here, the safety expert tells us that although treating tuna with carbon monoxide to prevent it from
turning brown as it ages does not make the tuna harmful, it also is true that treating tuna in this way
can lead to more people getting sick from eating tuna.

This is a Resolve the Paradox question. Generally, we can say that the correct answer choice will tell
us something about using the carbon monoxide treatment on tuna that leads to more people getting
sick from eating tuna. But this particular scenario is susceptible to a more specific prephrase as well.
The whole point of treating the tuna with carbon monoxide is to keep it from turning brown when
it ages. If the potential harm caused by the process does not result from the carbon monoxide itself,
then the harm may result from an unintended consequence of the process. Since tuna will no longer
turn brown as it ages, the consumers will lose that visual clue regarding the tuna’s freshness and may
accidentally eat tuna that has spoiled.

Answer choice (A): The stimulus was about the tuna’s dangerousness, not about the risk to the
workers treating the tuna with carbon monoxide.

Answer choice (B): While it makes sense that if more people throughout the world eat tuna, then
there may be more people who get sick from eating tuna, this answer choice offers no insight as to
why the carbon monoxide process will lead to more people getting sick from eating tuna.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice, because it tells us how the carbon monoxide
treatment can lead to more people getting sick from eating tuna. Consistent with our specific
prephrase described above, the process has the unintended consequence of masking spoiled tuna.

Answer choice (D): This answer choice explains why carbon monoxide is used in the process, but it
does not explain why the process leads to more people getting sick from eating tuna.

Answer choice (E): Here, the answer choice explains why a process such as the one described in the
stimulus is used in the first place. Again, however, this answer choice does not explain why more
people get sick from eating tuna as a result of the process.
 Cking14
  • Posts: 35
  • Joined: Mar 30, 2015
|
#19874
Hi,

I understand the stimulus in this question, but I chose answer choice (A). I chose (A) because it explained why people would continue to get sick. (C) is the correct answer here. Is that because people are actually eating the tuna vs. just having been exposed. It's true that people will continue to get sick even if these measures are taken in answer choice (A). Is that what I am missing? Eating vs. exposure?

Thanks!
Chris
 Robert Carroll
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1787
  • Joined: Dec 06, 2013
|
#19902
Chris,

The paradox in the stimulus is that people will get sick from eating the tuna, so you're right that answer choice (A) does not address this situation and discusses sickness in the wrong context. You have to explain both sides of the paradox as given in the stimulus, so answer choice (A) doesn't explain what it needs to.

Robert Carroll

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.