LSAT 3 – Section 2 – Question 14

LSAT 3 - Section 2 - Question 14

December 1991

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Target time: 1:38

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question QuickView	Type	Tags	Answer Choices	Curve	Question Difficulty	Psg/Game/S Difficulty	Explanation
PT3 S2 Q14	+LR	Weaken +Weak	A 2% 158 B 63% 164 C 4% 159 D 24% 157 E 7% 157	142 155 168	+Harder	148.13 +SubsectionMedium

This page shows a recording of a live class. We're working hard to create our standard, concise explanation videos for the questions in this PrepTest. Thank you for your patience!

This is a weakening question: Which one of the following, if true, is the most effective counter Pamela might make to Quincy’s argument.

In this stimulus we have a dialogue between Pamela and Quincy. Pamela argues that the long hours of residency staff doctors impairs their ability to make the best decisions in the later parts of their shift. That makes sense, I barely feel like I can make good decisions after eight hours of work, let alone 36 consecutive hours!

Quincy responds that records show that the trainees have generally made good medical decisions, so there is no reason to change the situation. We should note that Quincy’s argument relies on inductive reasoning; what is true in the past will be true in the future. Put more crudely: if ain’t broke, don’t fix it. We want to show that what worked before is now broken. Just because doctors were able to make good decisions previously doesn’t mean the situation is the same in the present; maybe the day-to-day work environment has changed in some way! We want an answer that will give us a reason why the long shifts could now be impairing the doctors, even if in the past the same regimen led to good decisions. Let’s see our options:

Answer Choice (A) This would strengthen Quincy’s position that a new model isn’t needed! All it adds is that one large part of resident staff work, their basic responsibilities, is the same as when records show them making good decisions.

Correct Answer Choice (B) If patients are more seriously ill on average than they were before, than that suggests Quincy old records aren’t representative of the current situation. This directly weakens Quincy’s inductive reasoning by demonstrating that the present is different from the past.

Answer Choice (C) This would support that we need the staff working long hours, without establishing whether there is a reason why they won’t make good decisions now even though they made good decisions previously.

Answer Choice (D) It could vary between specialties and still not be bad enough in any specialty to cause residents to make poor decisions.

Answer Choice (E) Do they need to be active for the whole 36 hours? Regardless, all this answer could do is strengthen Quincy’s argument by giving a reason why the 36 hour shifts are necessary, without addressing whether there will in fact be poor decisions due to the long hours.

LSAT 3 – Section 2 – Question 14

LSAT 3 - Section 2 - Question 14

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 3 Explanations

Section 1 - Logic Games

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Leave a Reply Cancel