PT 9, LR1, Question 12: Purebred Dogs

User avatar
ehall20
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:48 am

PT 9, LR1, Question 12: Purebred Dogs

Postby ehall20 » Tue Apr 24, 2012 1:44 pm

I understand why choice A is correct, but to me it seems like C is equally correct.

The conclusion only states that dog owners who want to "reduce the risk of incurring costly medical bills" should choose nonpurebred dogs. It doesn't say anything about dog owners who want to reduce the risk of paying medical bills to fix genetic abnormalities.

Therefore, If purebred dogs tended to have a shorter lifespan, wouldn't this mean there was a shorter time period to incur medical expenses? I understand this might be a bit of a stretch, but the correct answer seems like it's a bit of a stretch as well.

User avatar
princeR
Posts: 308
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:10 pm

Re: PT 9, LR1, Question 12: Purebred Dogs

Postby princeR » Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:01 pm

The assumption is that because purebred dogs are more prone to genetically determined abnormalities they will have to undergo expensive surgeries to treat them. However, what if these genetically determined abnormalities don't actually do anything and in fact "do not seriously affect a dog's general well-being", if that were true, than surgery wouldn't even be necessary.

Answer choice C tells us about life spans. We don't know anything about life spans. While it might be true that they live shorter, that doesn't mean anything. You would have to make the unwarranted assumption that as a dog ages it is more prone to illnesses that require costly medical procedures. This is an unwarranted assumption.

To be honest, I was stuck for a second with answer choice E. In my head I was thinking that E could possibly mean that you could purchase a nonpurebred dog thinking that it would have no genetic abnormalities but than it it actually could. If this were true, than the prescription to bug a nonpurebred dog would lose a little strength because both breeds could potentially have genetic abnormalities.

A still weakens the conclusion the most.

User avatar
ehall20
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:48 am

Re: PT 9, LR1, Question 12: Purebred Dogs

Postby ehall20 » Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:36 pm

Thanks for your response, I totally agree with you on why A weakens the argument. My assumption with C wasn't that as a dog ages it's more prone to illnesses, but simply that it would be pretty difficult for a dead dog to incur medical expenses.

If we assume that a nonpurebred lives 20 years and a purebred lives 10 years (these figures are not necessary, but please bear with me for the sake of argument), then that means that the purebred owner is going to have 10 years less time where medical expenses might be incurred.

The conclusion specifies dog owners who want to "reduce the risk of incurring costly medical bills". For the span of time the average purebred would tend to be dead and the average nonpurebred would still be alive (10 years with my earlier assumption), this effectively reduces the risk of medical expenses to 0 for the purebred owner (because, ya know, their dog is dead).

Edit: Rereading my post I came across as a bit of a deuchecanoe. I'm not saying you're wrong, and I understand that my reasoning doesn't lead to the correct answer. What I'm trying to figure out is if my reasoning itself is faulty, or if it's logically sound and I just missed what the test-makers were looking for.

03152016
Posts: 9189
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am

Re: PT 9, LR1, Question 12: Purebred Dogs

Postby 03152016 » Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:31 am

.
Last edited by 03152016 on Tue Mar 15, 2016 2:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ehall20
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2012 10:48 am

Re: PT 9, LR1, Question 12: Purebred Dogs

Postby ehall20 » Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:01 am

Thanks for the response, I see the errors in my ways (no snarkasm).




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros, Instrumental, jagerbom79 and 5 guests