Medical researcher: As expected, records covering the last four years of ten major hospitals indicate that babies born prematurely were more likely to have low birth weights and to suffer from health problems than were babies not born prematurely. These records also indicate that mothers who had received adequate prenatal care were less likely to have low birth weight babies than were mothers who had received inadequate prenatal care. Adequate prenatal care, therefore, significantly decreases the risk of low birth weight babies.Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the medical researcher's argument?
Answer(s): B
We have to weaken the medical researcher's argument, so as usual we have to identify the components of the argument. The conclusion is that adequate prenatal care significantly decreases the risk of low birth weight babies. The evidence for this is that hospital records show that mothers who had received adequate prenatal care were less likely to have low birth weight babies. The medical researcher also tells us that records show that babies born prematurely were more likely to have low birth weights than on-time babies. This is a classic correlation = causation argument: the author cites a high correlation between inadequate prenatal care and low birth weight babies, and then concludes that one must have caused the other. In most cases the best way to weaken these arguments is to find an alternative explanation, or to find a situation where the two are not correlated (you see X, but you don't see Y).
Formal performance evaluations in the professional world are conducted using realistic situations. Physicians are allowed to consult medical texts freely, attorneys may refer to law books and case records, and physicists and engineers have their manuals at hand for ready reference. Students, then, should likewise have access to their textbooks whenever they take examinations.The reasoning in the argument is questionable because the argument
Answer(s): E
This is a Flaw question. For these questions, it's usually possible to form a prephrase of the answer, which should save you time in reviewing answer choices. Put simply, the argument says that students should be allowed to have open book tests. Why? Because in performance evaluations in the professional world, doctors, lawyers, etc. are allowed to refer to their books. This is nothing more than an argument by analogy. The operating assumption in all arguments by analogy is that the two things that are compared are, in fact, comparable. Therefore, the best way to weaken them is to show how the two things are not comparable. Or, in this case, where you must determine why the reasoning is questionable, look for an answer choice that says something along the lines of "the reasoning is flawed because it tries to compare apples and oranges." Option [fails to consider the possibility that the purposes of...] does just that by saying that the author hasn't considered the possibility that the purposes of the two tests mentioned in the stimulus are in fact quite dissimilar.
This morning, a bakery makes exactly one delivery, consisting of exactly six loaves of bread. Each of the loaves is exactly one of three kinds: oatmeal, rye, or wheat, and each is either sliced or unsliced. The loaves that the bakery delivers this morning must be consistent with the following:There are at least two kinds of loaves.There are no more than three rye loaves.There is no unsliced wheat loaf.There is at least one unsliced oatmeal loaf.If two or more of the loaves are unsliced, then at least one of the unsliced loaves is rye.Which one of the following could be a complete and accurate list of the loaves that the bakery delivers?
Answer(s): D
As it turns out, Rule 5 eliminates all the wrong choices, but if you tackled the rules in order, here's what you would have found: Rule 1 kills option [six unsliced oatmeal loaves], which has only oatmeal loaves. Rule 2 doesn't help, but Rule 3 kills option [five unsliced oatmeal loaves, one unsliced wheat loaf]., which has the for bidden unsliced wheat loaf. Rule 4 doesn't help, but Rule 5 knocks off options [five unsliced oatmeal loaves, one sliced rye loaf] and [four unsliced oatmeal loaves, two sliced wheat loaves], which each have two or more unsliced loaves but no unsliced rye loaf.
This morning, a bakery makes exactly one delivery, consisting of exactly six loaves of bread. Each of the loaves is exactly one of three kinds: oatmeal, rye, or wheat, and each is either sliced or unsliced. The loaves that the bakery delivers this morning must be consistent with the following:Each of the following could be a complete and accurate list of the unsliced loaves that the bakery delivers EXCEPT:
Answer(s): A
The reference to unsliced loaves should point you to Rules 3, 4, and 5. Each choice has at least one unsliced oatmeal loaf, and there's no unsliced wheat loaf among the choices, but option [three oatmeal loaves] is a straightforward violation of Rule 5. With more than one unsliced loaf, this option needs to have an unsliced rye loaf as well, but it isn't there.
This morning, a bakery makes exactly one delivery, consisting of exactly six loaves of bread. Each of the loaves is exactly one of three kinds: oatmeal, rye, or wheat, and each is either sliced or unsliced. The loaves that the bakery delivers this morning must be consistent with the following:Which one of the following statements CANNOT be true?
Answer(s): C
Post your Comments and Discuss Test Prep LSAT Test exam prep with other Community members: