Logical reasoning PrepTest 113 · Section 3 · Question 4

Question prompt

Doctor: The practice of Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: E

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Valid

Question Type

Main Point Questions

Stimulus Summary

(Implied opposing point: This therapy is more effective than no therapy, so it should be used.)
Doctor: The therapy is expensive and complicated, so the fact that it’s more effective than nothing isn’t enough by itself to justify using it.

Answer Anticipation

The Doctor’s opening statement is complicated, but it falls into a common category of conclusion - an opinion on an opposing point. While no opposing point is explicitly mentioned in the argument, the Doctor stating that something is insufficient to prove something else implies an argument that it is sufficient to prove something else. This type of statement - that an opposing set of premises doesn’t justify the conclusion - is a very common conclusion in arguments on the LSAT.
Since the opening line is an opinion of a potential opposing point, it’s likely the main point of the argument. The Doctor then backs up her view that something isn’t sufficient to prove another by bringing up other considerations. These considerations are factual (how much something costs; how complicated it is), suggesting that this statement is a premise.
So that opening line is the conclusion, but it’s phrased in a complex manner, so we want to be careful as we look at answer choices. In particular, we want to be careful that we don’t fall for a common trap here - the Doctor doesn’t state that the therapy shouldn’t be used to treat the illness, just that its effectiveness isn’t a sufficient reason to justify its use.

Answer choices

  1. A
    The therapy is more Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    This is what the Doctor believes is insufficient alone to justify using the therapy. Her conclusion is an opinion on the implications of this statement, so it’s not the conclusion.
  2. B
    The therapy is more Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    There’s no comparison between this treatment and other treatments, so this answer is incorrect.
  3. C
    The therapy is more Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    First, the stimulus never states this - just that the therapy is expensive and complicated, not more expensive/complicated than alternatives. Second, even if that shift weren’t present, this is still reflecting a premise.
  4. D
    The therapy should not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    The argument’s conclusion is that effectiveness isn’t sufficient to justify using a therapy, so a statement establishing what is sufficient for using the therapy (here, actually, for not using it) don’t reflect that conclusion.
  5. E
    The therapy's possible effectiveness Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem
    This answer reflects the first statement - that effectiveness isn’t the only consideration in picking a therapy for an illness. There are other factors to consider - such as cost and complexity.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 5%
  2. B 1%
  3. C 6%
  4. D 9%
  5. E Credited 79%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

  • Y idnt 3 replies

    Started by samuel

View all discussions Start a discussion