PT18.S4.Q16 - Dr. Kim: Electronic fetal monitors

akistotle

https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-4-question-16/
Strengthen Question

I was able to get this one correct by eliminating wrong choices, but I have a question regarding the answer choice (C).

(C) says when two methods provide the same type of information, the more intrusive one shouldn't be used.

From Dr. K's argument, we know that electronic fetal monitors (EFM) "do no more" to increase the chances that a baby will be born in good health than ordinary stethoscopes, but does this mean EFM and ordinary stethoscopes provide the same kind of info?

From Dr. A's argument, we know that Dr. K does acknowledge that both methods provide the same information, but can we use our knowledge we get from Dr. A's argument to strengthen Dr. K's argument?

Mellow_Z

I would just like to say, I greatly appreciate you linking the question in your posts. (SUBTLE RECOMMENDATION TO EVERYONE ELSE, COUGH)

edit : I like Sami's explanation better than mine so I'm removing it to not confuse others

Sami

@akistotle said:
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-18-section-4-question-16/
Strengthen Question

I was able to get this one correct by eliminating wrong choices, but I have a question regarding the answer choice (C).

(C) says when two methods provide the same type of information, the more intrusive one shouldn't be used.

From Dr. K's argument, we know that electronic fetal monitors (EFM) "do no more" to increase the chances that a baby will be born in good health than ordinary stethoscopes, but does this mean EFM and ordinary stethoscopes provide the same kind of info?

From Dr. A's argument, we know that Dr. K does acknowledge that both methods provide the same information, but can we use our knowledge we get from Dr. A's argument to strengthen Dr. K's argument?

Yeah, I think that's fine because Dr. A does say "you and I know". This implies three things:
1) This sentence serves the function of a premise in Dr. A's argument. A premise is not something that LSAT usually questions the truth of.
2) The word "knowledge" implies that this information is a fact rather than a conclusion.
3) Dr. A and Dr. K both know that both these methods provide same information.
*I think in this way we can make the inference that even though this sentence comes from A's argument, it's true.

Dr. K's argument doesn't directly imply that they provide the same information. It's just that the information is equally helpful.

I hope this was more helpful. Unlike the last time I could go and check here what the stimulus is actually saying .

Also, one thing I have noticed in a stimulus that has a dialog between two people is that the correct answer choice addresses the other guys' argument in some way. Otherwise it's not strengthening the first argument. Had they ignored the second argument they are committing the flaw of just ignoring the objection. So in that way answer choice "C" makes perfect sense in why it had some information from "A"'s argument.

akistotle

Thank you so much for your comments, @Mellow_Z and @Sami !

I guess I somehow mistakenly thought I should strengthen the argument using information from the same argument.

@Sami said:

Also, one thing I have noticed in a stimulus that has a dialog between two people is that the correct answer choice addresses the other guys' argument in some way.

This is really helpful insight! Thank you

Otherwise it's not strengthening the first argument. Had they ignored the second argument they are committing the flaw of just ignoring the objection. So in that way answer choice "C" makes perfect sense in why it had some information from "A"'s argument.

You are right; C makes perfect sense now

conraddnoronha

It comes directly from Dr. Anders' statement "You and I know that both methods are capable of providing the same information"