PrepTest 158, Section 3, Question 4
Generally, it is important that people practice what(37 more words not shown)
A questionable aspect of the(11 more words not shown)
- Alogicians' being illogical(15 more words not shown)
- Bif a physician's(13 more words not shown)
- Cphysicians who are(15 more words not shown)
- Dit is more(17 more words not shown)
- Ealthough it is(19 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
A doctor can give sound advice without following that advice. A smoker could correctly tell a patient not to smoke. Failing to follow the advice doesn't make the advice false.
But read the other half of this comparison carefully. We're talking about a logician being illogical while discussing logic. That's a failure in the work itself. The physician's unhealthy lifestyle concerns how the physician lives; the logician's faulty reasoning concerns how the logician does the job.
What we’re looking for
That difference matters. A doctor could live unhealthily and still diagnose a patient correctly. The logician's faulty reasoning, on the other hand, is a flaw in the very work we're evaluating. We shouldn't treat those as equivalent examples of failing to practice what one preaches. For the flaw question, that's the difference to look for: a personal habit versus competence in the actual work.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
Being illogical in a discussion of logic is a failure to do that work competently. Having an unhealthy lifestyle doesn't by itself mean a physician treats patients incompetently. The argument ignores this difference when it treats logical discussion and a healthy lifestyle as equally unnecessary to the two professions' work.
- B
Severe illness could prevent a doctor from treating patients effectively. But an unhealthy lifestyle doesn't necessarily make someone that ill or interfere with their medical judgment. B also leaves the logician's work unexplained. It doesn't identify the direct contrast between doing the job badly and failing to follow one's advice outside that job.
- C
Which incompetent professional might cause more harm? That's a separate comparison. We need to know whether the stated behavior amounts to incompetence in the first place. A doctor's unhealthy habits need not prevent good treatment, while illogical reasoning undermines a discussion of logic. Ranking the possible harm doesn't explain that difference.
- D
How difficult something is doesn't tell us whether it's required. Reasoning logically could be harder or easier than changing a lifestyle, and we'd still need to distinguish what each professional must do to perform the work competently. The argument's comparison concerns necessity, not difficulty.
- E
This accepts the idea we challenged: that logical reasoning isn't necessary for competent discussion of logic. Calling it desirable doesn't expose the problem. We need an answer showing why doing the reasoning competently is central to this work, unlike following healthy habits in one's private life.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.