PrepTest 102, Section 3, Question 12
Carl: Researchers who perform operations on animals for(111 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(15 more words not shown)
- ANot all operations(8 more words not shown)
- BSome experimentation that(11 more words not shown)
- CPreparing pain protocols(7 more words not shown)
- DSome surgical operations(5 more words not shown)
- EUnalleviated pain after(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What about a baby who needs a painful operation?
Debbie's response makes sense for a patient who can understand the expected pain and choose whether to proceed. That ability distinguishes such a patient from an animal being used in an experiment. It gives us a reason not to assume that identical paperwork is the only way to show equal concern.
But Debbie concludes that pain protocols are unnecessary for human beings generally. Not every human patient can make the decision she describes. An infant cannot be told what pain to expect and then weigh whether to undergo surgery. The same concern could arise for another patient unable to understand or communicate a decision.
If the protection Debbie relies on isn't available to those patients, her reason for dispensing with protocols doesn't cover them. That doesn't by itself tell us what every hospital must do; it identifies a hole in her argument.
What we’re looking for
For the weakener, I'd look for a case in which a human patient faces pain but can't use the safeguard Debbie cites. A painful operation on an infant would put that exception directly in view.
Working the answers
- A
Some human operations being painless doesn't undermine Debbie's claim that pain protocols are unnecessary. It leaves us with operations for which there may be little pain to plan around. Our objection needs a patient who faces pain without being able to make the informed choice Debbie describes.
- B
Eliminating unnecessary animal experiments might be worth considering, but it doesn't address Debbie's reason for treating human operations differently. She argues that humans can be informed and decide. Whether some animal experiments should happen at all doesn't show that this safeguard fails for a human patient.
- C
Easy, inexpensive paperwork can still be unnecessary. Debbie doesn't reject protocols because they cost too much or take too long. She says the patient's ability to understand and choose makes them unnecessary. Reducing their administrative burden doesn't answer that reasoning.
- DCorrect
Some infants undergo painful surgery, yet an infant can't make the informed decision Debbie describes. Here is a human patient with a need for protection from pain and without the ability that supposedly replaces a protocol.
The answer doesn't have to prove that every operation should use a protocol. It weakens the broad claim that humans don't need them by showing a case her justification fails to cover. For this relevant purpose, the infant resembles the experimental animal more than the informed adult in Debbie's response.
- E
Delayed healing gives an additional reason to manage pain. But Debbie could agree that pain should be managed while continuing to argue that a special protocol is unnecessary because patients can make informed choices. E doesn't show where that proposed safeguard fails. D directly identifies patients unable to use it.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.