Prep Test 58: Question #5 on Section 1 (LR) HELP!!

BluePlanet2050
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 3:48 pm

Prep Test 58: Question #5 on Section 1 (LR) HELP!!

Postby BluePlanet2050 » Wed Nov 24, 2010 3:58 pm

The answer to this question is A; can someone please explain the logic behind this logical reasoning question. Thanks a lot!
Last edited by BluePlanet2050 on Wed Nov 24, 2010 4:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

tomwatts
Posts: 1551
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 12:01 am

Re: Prep Test 58: Question #5 on Section 1 (LR) HELP!!

Postby tomwatts » Wed Nov 24, 2010 4:18 pm

You'll want to remove the wording of the question (copyright issues).

One way to look at the structure of the argument is this:
Premise: Herbs don't have dangerous side effects.
Main conclusion: Let doctors prescribe herbs.

If you can find some reason other than dangerous side effects that herbs shouldn't be prescribed, you've weakened the argument. This is the general form of "eliminate one objection to something and then conclude that it's true" that you see regularly on the LSAT. All you have to do is address another possible objection.

A does this. If herbs cause people to avoid more effective treatment, then herbs should be banned anyway, even if they don't directly cause harm. The indirect harm that herbs cause -- because they make people not use effective stuff -- is still reason enough to ban the herbs.

In brief:
B is off-topic; we don't care how they're marked, unless it impacts whether they should be prescribed.
C is too weak; if some patients have weird results, who cares? Maybe that's just like 2 or 3 people out of millions.
D is also off-topic; we don't care why the herbs exist but whether they should be prescribed (and besides, this isn't specific enough to herbs).
E is irrelevant; if the stuff works, then it works, regardless of why.

bee's vision
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:36 pm

Re: Prep Test 58: Question #5 on Section 1 (LR) HELP!!

Postby bee's vision » Wed Nov 24, 2010 4:29 pm

Look at the conclusion: doctors "should ALWAYS be allowed to prescribe herbs" for "serious illnesses." Why? Cause it couldn't hurt and might help.

A-right off the bat casts doubt on the premises by saying that patients neglect "more effective conventional medicine" because they're taking herbs which are less effective and could thereby harm the patient by not treating they're condition.

B-doesn't weaken because the argument acknowledges that the effectiveness has not been proven

C-If anything it strengthens the argument, by saying that herbs can be used when patients are allergic to other medicine.

D-doesn't weaken, irrelevant

E-doesn't weaken, could strengthen by revealing that there are certain benefits to herbal remedies.

User avatar
2Serious4Numbers
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:14 pm

Re: Prep Test 58: Question #5 on Section 1 (LR) HELP!!

Postby 2Serious4Numbers » Wed Nov 24, 2010 4:37 pm

I'm not even going to attempt to explain. skip this entire PT. 58 was the spawn of satan compared to all other PTs for me.

BluePlanet2050
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 3:48 pm

Re: Prep Test 58: Question #5 on Section 1 (LR) HELP!!

Postby BluePlanet2050 » Wed Nov 24, 2010 4:48 pm

o' boy...i completely failed to connect the dots on this one..thanks so much everyone...it makes a lot of sense now :-)




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, clueless801, Google [Bot], jagerbom79, ndp1234 and 22 guests