PrepTest 140

[lcid:3657] Prep Test 140 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S2 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Some heartburn-medication advertisements imply Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

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

Question Type

Main Point Questions

Answer choices

  1. A
    Only those people with Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    Incorrect. This answer is a fact presented about a specific group to show that the claim in the opposing point is limited to a smaller-than-a-majority group, and thus is false. As such, it's a premise and not the main point of the argument.
  2. B
    An increase in the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Incorrect. This is an explanation of Barrett's esophagus, which is presented as a "fact" supporting the author's conclusion. This can be considered either background or a premise, but not the main point.
  3. C
    Unrelieved heartburn is not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem
    Correct. Argument or Facts:
    Argument

    Valid or Flawed:
    Valid

    Question Type:
    Main Point

    Stimulus Summary:
    Some ads: Unrelieved heartburn likely causes cancer
    Author: Those ads are wrong because (facts).

    Answer Anticipation:
    Yep, we drastically simplified this stimulus!

    The argument starts with what some ads claim, but it then pivots to the author's opinion of this claim—it's false. The author's opinion of an opposing point is almost always the main point of the argument, so we have a good candidate for a correct answer already!

    That's further supported by the following statement being a "fact," since facts are almost always premises. The final statement is another fact that builds on the preceding statement to support the conclusion that the ad's claim is false, so that second sentence is the main point.

    We're not done yet, however—we have to restate the conclusion to reflect the content of it. When an author states that an opposing claim is "false," that's more than stating it's invalid or unsupported—it's establishing that the opposite claim is true. Here, stating that claims of untreated heartburn likely causing cancer are false is equivalent to concluding that untreated heartburn isn't likely to cause cancer.

    Answer Explanation:
    This answer is the rephrasing of the author's opinion of the opposing point to reflect the actual belief stated in her judgment. It's backed up by a discussion of how the increased risk of cancer is limited to 5% of the population, thus showing the opposing point's claim that this risk is over 50% ("likely") to be false.

    Key Takeaway:
    The author's opinion of an opposing point is almost always the main point of the argument. However, when the conclusion is stated in a manner that refers back to that viewpoint ("This is simply false"), you should take the time to rephrase it as an actual statement of the author's belief. The answer may match the written language, but it might also reflect the actual belief (as it did here), making it a lot easier to find the right answer if you've already anticipated that.
  4. D
    Some heartburn-medication advertisements imply Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Incorrect. This answer reflects the opposing point, not the main point of the argument.
  5. E
    The dangers touted by Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Incorrect. While the author of the argument does believe that only 5% of the population is at risk of the dangers in these ads, she never weighs in on how that intersects with those who see the ads. Maybe these ads only run in Barrett's Esophagus Sufferers Weekly, and thus those seeing the ad are in that 5% who do have to worry about the increased risk of cancer.

What this tests

Discussion

  • Why not E? 1 reply

    Started by JenniferZ638