Logical reasoning PrepTest 109 · Section 1 · Question 13

Incorrect. The argument doesn't require assuming that a patient's psychological satisfaction is "not a consideration" when prescribing something. In fact it relies on it being a consideration. What it assumes is that it shouldn't be the only consideration and if it is then providing a specific treatment is ethically questionable.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Necessary Premise

Stimulus Summary:
Even if a placebo helps a patient, the doctor might have prescribed it just to placate the patient. Therefore, giving placebos is not necessarily ethical.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument has two features that we can use to spot the gap in it.

First, the conclusion draws a judgment—that a certain action is "ethically questionable." However none of the premises establish what makes a practice ethically questionable—they don't discuss ethics at all! When a new concept shows up in the conclusion of the argument it's going to be a part of the assumption. Here what does the Ethicist believe speaks to the ethics of the situation?

That brings us to the second common element associated with flawed logic that we can focus on here. The premises discuss the motive of the doctor in prescribing the placebo—not helping the patient but rather giving the patient "satisfaction that something was being done." In other words the doctor didn't have curing the patient as a motive for giving them a placebo. This motive is what the Ethicist must believe is enough to justify a conclusion that the act was ethically questionable since there's no other premise supporting that conclusion.

So the argument is assuming that a doctor who prescribes a treatment motivated by a desire to placate a patient is acting in an ethically questionable manner. Let's find an answer stating that.

Answer Explanation:
This answer is a watered down version of our anticipation but answers that are weaker than the assumption can still be correct in Strengthen with Necessary Premise questions. This answer connects motive to ethics. If the motivation can't be relevant to the ethics of an action then the Ethicist's argument falls apart since she relies solely on the motive behind prescribing placebos to call it ethically questionable.

Key Takeaway:
When a new concept shows up in the conclusion of a Strengthen with Necessary Premise question it's a part of the gap in the logic of the argument. Also motive—when discussed—is almost always relevant to the correct answer so be on the lookout for a discussion of it!

Incorrect. This answer talks about something that is ethically "indefensible," which is stronger than the judgment in the stimulus that something is ethically "questionable." As such this answer isn't necessary for the argument since it "overshoots" the conclusion.

Incorrect. The Ethicist concludes that prescribing a placebo is ethically questionable "even if" it works so the argument can't rely on it working justifying its use.

Incorrect. The stimulus never discusses a situation where someone other than a doctor is prescribing a placebo, so this answer is out of scope.