LSAT 113 – Section 3 – Question 04

LSAT 113 - Section 3 - Question 04

June 2002

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:01

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
PT113 S3 Q04
+LR
+Exp
Main conclusion or main point +MC
Net Effect +NetEff
A
1%
154
B
0%
155
C
3%
154
D
7%
159
E
89%
166
131
142
153
 +Medium 146.265 +SubsectionMedium

J.Y.’s explanation

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

Doctor: The practice of using this therapy to treat the illness cannot be adequately supported by the claim that any therapy for treating the illness is more effective than no therapy at all. What must also be taken into account is that this therapy is expensive and complicated.

Summarize Argument
The doctor thinks that the mere claim that some treatment is better than no treatment is not enough of a reason to support using a certain therapy to treat an illness. To support this, the doctor tells us that the therapy is expensive and complicated. This introduces additional factors that might make the therapy not worth it, even if the alternative is no treatment at all.

Identify Conclusion
The doctor’s conclusion is that using the therapy “cannot be adequately supported” just because it represents some treatment rather than no treatment at all.

A
The therapy is more effective than no treatment at all for the illness.
This is not stated in the argument. The doctor never actually mentions whether the therapy is effective or not, and nothing in the argument would support an inference that it’s effective.
B
The therapy is more effective than other forms of treatment for the illness.
This is not stated in the argument. Like (C), the doctor does not discuss any other possible treatments, so cannot compare them to the therapy that is discussed.
C
The therapy is more expensive and complicated than other forms of treatment for the illness.
This is not stated in the argument. Like (B), the doctor does not discuss any other possible treatments, so cannot compare them to the therapy that is discussed.
D
The therapy should not be used to treat the illness unless it is either effective or inexpensive.
This is not stated in the argument. The doctor doesn’t make any recommendations about when the therapy “should” or “should not” be used, just says that a certain claim isn’t sufficient to justify its use.
E
The therapy’s possible effectiveness in treating the illness is not sufficient justification for using it.
This is a good paraphrase of the conclusion. The doctor’s entire goal is to support this claim, that just because the therapy is some treatment rather than no treatment, that isn’t enough to justify its use.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 113 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply