PrepTest 102

[lcid:3506] Prep Test 102 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S3 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Carl: Researchers who perform Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

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

Argument or Facts

Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed/Flawed

Question Type

Methods of Reasoning Questions

Stimulus Summary

C: Animal researchers have to develop pain protocols to minimize or alleviate pain, but doctors don’t do this for people, so they should. D: People can be informed of pain risks and decide to take them on, so they’re unnecessary.

Answer Anticipation

Normally, when we’re describing a rebuttal in a Methods of Reasoning question, we go through an analysis on how the second speaker feels about the premises and conclusion of the opposing point. However, when a rebuttal uses a particularly common method of rebutting an argument, we can skip over and focus just on that! Here, Debbie’s rebuttal does fall into a common pattern, based on the type of logic used in Carl’s argument. And Carl’s argument is one about similarities. His conclusion is that humans should be treated similarly to animals when they’re about to undergo procedures. And we know from dealing with similarity-based arguments in Weaken questions that a way to rebut such an argument is to highlight a relevant difference. That’s what Debbie does here - she brings up a relevant difference between humans and animals to show that what is necessary for the latter isn’t necessary for the former. So let’s find an answer reflecting that method of rebuttal.

Answer choices

  1. A
    showing that one of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    Debbie doesn’t attack any of Carl’s claims - rather, she attacks his assumption that animals and humans are relevant in all similar ways. She doesn’t question the information about animals and pain protocols or what is true of human operations.
  2. B
    pointing out a relevant Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    This answer reflects both Carl’s and Debbie’s arguments. He bases his argument on humans and animals being analogous, and Debbie brings up a relevant difference to undermine it.
  3. C
    claiming that Carl's argument Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Debbie’s issue isn’t with the sentimentality of Carl’s argument, but rather with its analogy. That said, Carl’s argument isn’t particularly sentimental - he assumes that humans should be treated at least as well as animals, which isn’t a sentimental argument!
  4. D
    drawing an analogy that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Carl relies on an analogy, not Debbie. She speaks only about people.
  5. E
    offering a specific example Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    There’s no specific example in Debbie’s argument, and she doesn’t focus on the provability of Carl’s.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion