PrepTest 113, Section 3, Question 4
Doctor: The practice of using this therapy to(40 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(10 more words not shown)
- AThe therapy is(10 more words not shown)
- BThe therapy is(10 more words not shown)
- CThe therapy is(12 more words not shown)
- DThe therapy should(14 more words not shown)
- EThe therapy's possible(12 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Better than nothing can still be a poor bargain. Imagine a supposed treatment that produces only a tiny benefit but requires paying a celebrity to come to your house. Grant that small improvement for the example. The fee could be enormous, and arranging the visit could be difficult. Knowing it beats doing nothing wouldn't answer whether the benefit is worth all that trouble.
That helps me follow the doctor's point. The doctor isn't declaring the therapy worthless. Perhaps it is worth using once we consider everything. The objection is that its possible benefit doesn't provide enough justification by itself; its expense and complexity matter too.
What we’re looking for
For the main conclusion, I'd look for that objection to the offered reason. We don't yet have an all-things-considered decision about treatment. We have a claim that 'more effective than nothing' doesn't settle the decision.
Working the answers
- A
This gives the claim whose adequacy the doctor questions. Even if the therapy is more effective than no treatment, the doctor says that isn't enough to support using it. A leaves out the actual point about the limits of that justification. The passage doesn't require us to independently establish that the therapy works.
- B
The comparison in the argument is with no therapy, not with competing treatments. Nothing ranks this therapy's effectiveness against another one. A treatment could beat doing nothing while being much less effective than some alternative.
- C
Expensive and complicated compared with what? The doctor says the therapy has those drawbacks but doesn't compare it with other therapies. Another treatment could cost even more and require even more difficult arrangements. C adds a ranking that the argument never gives.
- D
This supplies a rule about when the therapy should not be used. The doctor instead says the stated justification is inadequate. D makes being effective or inexpensive a requirement for using the therapy. The doctor hasn't offered that particular requirement or made a final decision under those conditions. The main claim concerns the reason offered for using it.
- ECorrect
Possible effectiveness isn't sufficient justification for using this therapy. That is the claim the expense and complexity support. The doctor wants those additional considerations included in the decision, rather than treating any improvement over no treatment as decisive.
We can agree with that reasoning without concluding that the therapy should never be used. Inadequate support for a choice and proof that the choice is bad are different things.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.