PT 52 LR (Section 3 #13)

boomer07
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:16 pm

PT 52 LR (Section 3 #13)

Postby boomer07 » Fri May 28, 2010 9:11 pm

I got the correct answer but wasted a lot of time and am not really sure why E is incorrect. If most people seriously injured un auto sccidents in country X DO currently receive treatment in specialized trauma centers, then isn't it unlikely that increasing accessibility to specialized trauma centers would have any real impact on the gross national product, and therefore a legit challenge to the conclusion?

User avatar
alphagamma
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 9:16 pm

Re: PT 52 LR (Section 3 #13)

Postby alphagamma » Fri May 28, 2010 10:56 pm

No, it's not a challenge to the conclusion. The stimulus never says anything about how many people will be helped by the new system (only that it could save the lives of many people). So, for example, if 10,000 people are seriously injured every year, and 9,000 of them (most) already receive care at specialized trauma centers, then that still leaves 1,000 (many) to be helped. And those 1,000 could make a huge difference (avg. $32,000 per year income each, or about $1.3 billion over 40 years).

The correct answer (that those saved people will be able to get jobs), if reversed (meaning they will make $0), rips the argument apart much more effectively.

boomer07
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 12:16 pm

Re: PT 52 LR (Section 3 #13)

Postby boomer07 » Fri May 28, 2010 11:00 pm

Makes sense...thank you alphagamma!




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests