PrepTest 140, Section 2, Question 8
Mark: The decongestant drug Zokaz was discontinued by(65 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(11 more words not shown)
- Ausing a product's(17 more words not shown)
- Battempting to discredit(14 more words not shown)
- Carguing against a(16 more words not shown)
- Dattempting to undermine(14 more words not shown)
- Echallenging an argument(12 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Why did Zokaz increase heart-attack risk? Knowing how it relieved congestion doesn't answer that question.
Perhaps the unwanted effect came from an ingredient or the way the drug was delivered, rather than from the mechanism that produced the desired effect. Those are possibilities to investigate. Mark hasn't shown that the shared decongestive mechanism is what produced the heart-attack risk, so the similarity between the drugs doesn't settle their side effects.
Kathy accepts the similarity Mark relies on. Then she points to a difference: the drugs have different chemical compositions. She thinks that difference makes different side effects likely. We can still ask whether the chemical difference actually supports that prediction; Kathy hasn't proved that Qualzan is safe.
What we’re looking for
The question asks how her response works. Mark emphasizes what the drugs share, while Kathy emphasizes something they don't share. She's challenging his comparison by pointing out a potentially relevant difference.
Working the answers
- A
Kathy gives no overall safety record for Qualzan. She doesn't cite years of use without problems or results from studies of that drug. Her evidence is the chemical difference, which isn't the same as a demonstrated record of safety.
- B
There is no second, parallel argument offered to make Mark's reasoning look bad. Kathy stays with these two drugs and identifies a difference between them. Comparing the drugs isn't the same as comparing Mark's argument with another argument.
- C
Kathy does challenge Mark's conclusion, but she doesn't question the studies showing that Zokaz increased heart-attack risk. Those studies could be sound while the inference about Qualzan remained uncertain. Her objection concerns transferring a finding from one drug to the other.
- D
A chemical difference isn't a fundamental principle of medicine. Kathy doesn't state an established medical rule and show that Mark's conclusion violates it. She gives a feature that might limit the usefulness of his comparison.
- ECorrect
Mark argues by analogy: the drugs work through essentially the same mechanism, so he expects a similar harmful effect. Kathy challenges that move by identifying their different chemical compositions. The similarity may matter, but a relevant difference could matter too. E describes her reasoning without requiring us to agree that she has established which side effects Qualzan will have.
More Strategy of Argument questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strategy of Argument questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.