It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Hi everyone! I am trying to do a big u-haul of how I approach LR questions. I am trying to have a heightened focus on accuracy and process over speed and results. I'd really, REALLY, appreciate it if someone could give me feedback on how I analyzed/broke down this question and the answer choices (I got it wrong the first time). Thanks a bunch!
Conclusion: Herniated disks and bulging disks could not be the cause of serious back pain for back pain sufferers.
Why?
P: Half of group 1 had these herniate disks and bulging disks, yet they did not experience back pain.
The argument fails to consider something.
Flaws I can see:
These are two groups of people, how can we conclude something based off of two groups with distinct differences (back pain sufferers vs non back pain sufferers)?
Perhaps there are other key differences that cause the herniated disks or bulging disks to cause back pain for actual back pain sufferers.
Answer Choices: The doctor's argument fails to consider the possibility that...
A) This has it really wrong. To make it work, I needs to say the following:
A factor that is in the presence of a certain effect (HD or BG and no pain) may nonetheless be sufficient for a different effect (HD or BG may be enough to produce serious back pain).
This is not what the answer choice says, though. Also, how do we know that HD and BD do not NEED to be present in the circumstance where back pain is present?
B ) Yes, though worded in a way I did not expect, perhaps a third factor and herniated disks and bulging disks all cause serious back pain. This matches the flaw #2 I have above.
C) . This AC has the argument flipped and is assuming the error in the argument- that is the fact that perhaps the herniated disks are present and contribute causally to back pain.
D) This is not the flaw. So what if herniated disks might not occur in half the entire population? The flaw is that they are erroneously concluding something about two different sets of people (back pain vs non back pain and what causally contributes to both).
E- The error is not in the comparative likelihood of herniated or bulged disks' presence when there is pain vs when there is no pain. The flaw is that nevertheless, they are assuming that even if (imo) there are herniated disks present when pain is present, the pain is not caused by the herniated disks. Perhaps herniated or bulging disks and a third factor all together cause back pain.
Admin Note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-62-section-4-question-19/