PrepTest 152, Section 2, Question 12
If an activity significantly reduces chronic lower back(64 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(7 more words not shown)
- AThere are no(20 more words not shown)
- BTaking stretching classes(10 more words not shown)
- CFew treatment options(9 more words not shown)
- DNo previous studies(12 more words not shown)
- EMany doctors treating(20 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Equal reductions could both be very small.
The opening rule requires a significant reduction in chronic lower-back pain. It doesn't say doctors should be prepared to discuss an activity merely because a patient thinks it sounds useful. Imagine someone asking about a device seen in an advertisement: enthusiasm alone wouldn't show that the activity meets the stated condition.
The study gives us equality between yoga and stretching classes, but equality doesn't tell us the size of the benefit. Both could reduce pain a little without reducing it significantly. We should accept that there are reductions—the passage says so—while asking whether they are large enough for the rule to apply.
What we’re looking for
For the required assumption, I'd want that missing information about the benefit. If the stretching classes significantly reduce pain, yoga's equal reduction would satisfy the condition too. The conclusion is about being prepared to discuss merits with a patient who asks, not automatically prescribing yoga.
Working the answers
- A
Yoga needn't be the best available option to deserve discussion under this rule. Another activity could produce a larger reduction while yoga still produced a significant one. A demands a top ranking that the argument doesn't need.
- BCorrect
A significant reduction from stretching, combined with yoga's equal reduction, gives yoga the significant benefit the opening rule requires. That completes the argument's route to being prepared to discuss yoga.
Without the significant benefit, equality alone doesn't activate this rule: two tiny reductions are still equal. That doesn't mean doctors could never have another reason to discuss yoga. It means this argument needs the benefit threshold to justify its conclusion through the principle it offers.
- C
There could be many other treatments and yoga could still meet the significant-reduction standard. The rule doesn't limit discussion to situations where patients have few options. The number of alternatives doesn't establish the benefit of either activity studied.
- D
This study needn't be the first comparison ever made. Several earlier studies could have compared the activities without changing what this study establishes or what the opening rule requires. Novelty of the research isn't part of the argument.
- E
What doctors already discuss doesn't establish what they should be prepared to discuss under the stated principle. They could discuss stretching for various reasons, or fail to discuss something beneficial. Their existing behavior doesn't supply the missing significant reduction in pain.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.