LSAT 103 – Section 1 – Question 08

LSAT 103 - Section 1 - Question 08

September 1998

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:18

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
PT103 S1 Q08
+LR
+Exp
Necessary assumption +NA
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
0%
160
B
6%
154
C
3%
155
D
6%
160
E
86%
166
138
147
156
 +Medium 147.884 +SubsectionMedium

Based on data collected from policyholders, life insurance companies have developed tables that list standard weight ranges for various heights. Policyholders whose weight fell within the range given for their height lived longer than those whose weight fell outside their given range. Therefore, if people whose weight falls outside their given range modified their weight to fall within that range, their overall life expectancies would improve.

Summary
The argument concludes that if people modified their weight, based on their height, to fall within a standard range, they would live longer. This is supported by the claim that, according to insurance companies, people within the standard weight range for their height live longer.

Notable Assumptions
The argument uses a correlation as support to conclude that a causal relationship exists. This requires assuming that there aren’t other factors, underlying weight, that impact life expectancy and aren’t affected by a change in weight.
The argument also requires assuming that, even if a change in weight can improve life expectancy, making that change wouldn’t also involve damage to people’s health that would decrease their life expectancy.

A
Some people would be unwilling to modify their weights solely to increase the general population’s overall life expectancies.
People’s willingness to modify their weight is irrelevant—the argument is only claiming that some people could improve their life expectancy by modifying their weight, not that they necessarily will.
B
Life insurance companies intended their tables to guide individuals in adjusting their weights in order to increase their life spans.
The intention that led the insurance companies to create these tables is irrelevant to their actual usefulness to guide people’s changes in weight.
C
The tables include data gathered from policyholders whose deaths resulted from accidents in addition to those whose deaths resulted from natural causes.
If anything, the data would be a more reliable indicator of how weight impacts lifespan if accidental deaths were excluded, so an assumption that accidental deaths were included is not necessary.
D
Holders of life insurance policies do not have longer overall life expectancies than the general population.
The argument merely claims that people within the standard weight range lived longer than people outside that range. This relationship could still be true even if the general population has overall shorter life expectancies, so this is not necessary.
E
People’s efforts to modify their weight to conform to a given range would not damage their health enough to decrease their overall life expectancies.
If we were to negate this—if people’s weight-modification efforts were so harmful that their lifespans decreased—that could offset any increase in lifespan. That would deeply undermine the argument, making this assumption necessary.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 103 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply