Hi there so while I plan to answer your question specifically, I also see this as an opportunity to talk generally about important themes on the LSAT. When the author is making an evaluation, we have to ask ourselves what criteria the author used and whether that criterion sufficiently warrants the evaluation. Author makes an evaluation that the straight handles are better than S-shaped handles for preventing spinal injuries based on the criterion regarding compression stress. We have to assume that what we know about the relative discrepancy regarding compression stress is enough to warrant the evaluation that one is better at preventing spinal injuries. For us to validate that assumption we need to confirm that there are no other factors that could also lead to spinal injuries.
Comments
Hi there so while I plan to answer your question specifically, I also see this as an opportunity to talk generally about important themes on the LSAT. When the author is making an evaluation, we have to ask ourselves what criteria the author used and whether that criterion sufficiently warrants the evaluation. Author makes an evaluation that the straight handles are better than S-shaped handles for preventing spinal injuries based on the criterion regarding compression stress. We have to assume that what we know about the relative discrepancy regarding compression stress is enough to warrant the evaluation that one is better at preventing spinal injuries. For us to validate that assumption we need to confirm that there are no other factors that could also lead to spinal injuries.