LSAT 106 – Section 1 – Question 07

LSAT 106 - Section 1 - Question 07

June 1999

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:11

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
PT106 S1 Q07
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
A
8%
162
B
3%
163
C
5%
163
D
11%
165
E
73%
168
143
155
167
 +Harder 152.148 +SubsectionHarder

J.Y.’s explanation

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

Hospital auditor: The Rodríguez family stipulated that the funds they donated to the neurological clinic all be used to minimize patients’ suffering. The clinic administration is clearly violating those terms, since it has allocated nearly one fifth of those funds for research into new diagnostic technologies, instead of letting that money flow directly to its patients.

Clinic administrator: But the successful development of new technologies will allow early diagnosis of many neurological disorders. In most cases, patients who are treated in the early stages of neurological disorders suffer far less than do patients who are not treated until their neurological disorders reach advanced stages.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
In response to the hospital auditor’s claim that the Rodriguez family terms are being violated, the clinic administrator concludes in most cases patients treated in early stages suffer less compared to patients in advanced stages. As evidence, the clinic administrator points out that new technologies allow early diagnosis of many neurological disorders.

Describe Method of Reasoning
The clinic administrator counters the position held by the hospital auditor. She does this by interpreting what it would mean to minimize patient’s suffering. To her, minimizing patient’s suffering includes the development of new technologies that allow early diagnosis. Therefore, the clinic administrator implies that the Rodriguez family terms are not being violated.

A
demonstrating that the hospital auditor’s conclusion, though broadly correct, stands in need of a minor qualification
The clinic administrator does not agree with the hospital auditor’s conclusion. She is countering this conclusion by broadly interpreting what it means to minimize patient’s suffering.
B
showing that the hospital auditor’s argument fails to separate what is the case from what ought to be the case
The clinic administrator does not make a value statement about what ought to be done. Her argument is presented in a matter-of-fact way.
C
reminding the hospital auditor that, in the case at issue, being told what to do is tantamount to being told how to do it
The clinic administrator does not state that being told what to do is the equivalent of being told how to do it. Neither the clinic administrator or the hospital auditor explicitly mention how to minimize patient’s suffering.
D
arguing that, in assessing the severity of a violation, the reasoning motivating the violation needs to be considered
The clinic administrator does not agree that a violation has occurred. She thinks a violation has not occurred due to her interpretation of what it means to minimize patient’s suffering.
E
reinterpreting a key phrase in the hospital auditor’s argument so as to undermine an assumption underlying that argument
The key phrase being reinterpreted is what it means to minimize patient’s suffering. The hospital auditor assumes that new diagnostic technologies cannot minimize this suffering.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 106 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply