Free LSAT Practice Question

Question 1 of 1
ID: LSAT-LR-103
Section: Logical Reasoning
Topic: Principle
Difficulty level: Easy

Practice Mode: Single selected Question » Back to Overview

Manufacturer: We recalled the kettle over a fault in its base but not the toaster over a commoner fault in its timer. What settles it for us is whether an owner can establish unaided that her own unit is sound. A toaster owner can: the affected timers are stamped on the face. A kettle owner cannot.

Which one of the following principles most helps to justify the manufacturer's reasoning?

AHow widely a fault occurs does not decide whether a recall is owed; what decides is whether owners can establish unaided that their own units are free of it.

BA manufacturer that recalls a product for one fault should recall it for any commoner fault, since the more owners a fault affects the heavier the duty owed to them.

CA recall is owed where a maker's records cannot tell which units are faulty, and not owed where they identify those units and owners.

DA manufacturer should design its appliances so that any faulty batch carries a casing mark an owner can read unaided.

EA manufacturer that has decided on a recall need not tell the public before telling its retailers.

» Quit