PrepTest 140, Section 1, Question 3
Peter: Recent evidence suggests that moderate alcohol consumption(31 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(11 more words not shown)
- AIt takes for(16 more words not shown)
- BIt draws a(10 more words not shown)
- CIt fails to(13 more words not shown)
- DIt draws a(13 more words not shown)
- EIt fails to(16 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Some benefits? Fine. More benefits than harms? We haven't established that.
Peter gives us a reason moderate drinking might help: it makes the body less hospitable to certain illness-causing bacteria. Let's accept that benefit for the question. It still leaves us asking what else alcohol does. A benefit can coexist with harms that outweigh it, so we can't decide the overall balance by looking at only the favorable side.
There's a second jump. The evidence concerns moderate alcohol consumption. The conclusion drops that limit and endorses alcohol consumption in general. Why should evidence about a limited amount carry over to much larger amounts? Even if Peter had established a net benefit from moderate consumption, that wouldn't establish the same result regardless of how much someone drinks.
What we’re looking for
The flaw question could address either concern: the unexamined downsides or the shift from moderate consumption to consumption generally. Keep both in mind rather than insisting on one exact wording.
Working the answers
- A
Why people choose to drink doesn't establish whether drinking benefits them. They could drink for reasons unrelated to health and still experience the benefit Peter describes. The argument doesn't depend on a claim about their motives.
- B
Peter cites recent evidence, not popular belief, and doesn't compare popular belief with scientific opinion. This description doesn't match the reasoning in the passage.
- C
Another way to get a benefit doesn't show that this way lacks that benefit. There might be other ways to make the body inhospitable to the bacteria, but Peter isn't claiming alcohol is the only way to do that. The problems concern its overall effects and the amounts covered by the conclusion.
- DCorrect
The premise is restricted to moderate drinking, while the conclusion concerns drinking in general. A beneficial effect at a limited amount doesn't establish a benefit at higher amounts. D identifies that unsupported expansion even though it doesn't address our separate concern about weighing benefits against harms.
- E
Alcohol needn't affect every illness-causing bacterium to have some benefit. Helping against certain bacteria while leaving others unaffected is consistent with the evidence Peter gives. This doesn't identify the missing assessment of harms or justify extending a claim about moderate consumption to consumption generally.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.