LSAT 117 – Section 2 – Question 19

LSAT 117 - Section 2 - Question 19

October 2004

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:10

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
PT117 S2 Q19
+LR
Argument part +AP
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
3%
154
B
79%
163
C
2%
150
D
1%
153
E
15%
156
143
151
158
 +Medium 146.765 +SubsectionMedium

It is unlikely that the world will ever be free of disease. Most diseases are caused by very prolific microorganisms whose response to the pressures medicines exert on them is predictable: they quickly evolve immunities to those medicines while maintaining their power to infect and even kill humans.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author concludes that it is unlikely that disease will be eradicated. As support for this conclusion, the author states that most diseases are caused by prolific microorganisms that respond to medicines by quickly evolving immunities while maintaining their ability to infect and kill humans. In other words, a byproduct of the use of medicines is the evolution of potentially harmful microorganisms.

Identify Argument Part
The claim in the question stem is the main conclusion of the argument.

A
It is a conclusion that is claimed to follow from the premise that microorganisms are too numerous for medicines to eliminate entirely.
While (A) correctly identifies the claim in the question stem as a conclusion, the conclusion does not follow from the premise that microorganisms are too numerous for medicines to eliminate them entirely. Rather, the problem is that microorganisms quickly evolve immunities.
B
It is a conclusion for which a description of the responses of microorganisms to the medicines designed to cure the diseases they cause is offered as support.
(B) correctly identifies the claim in the question stem as the conclusion, and shows the correct relationship between the conclusion and the support. It is the response of microorganisms to medicines––their ability to evolve immunities––that supports the conclusion.
C
It is a premise offered in support of the claim that most disease-causing microorganisms are able to evolve immunities to medicines while retaining their ability to infect humans.
The claim in the question stem is the conclusion, not a premise.
D
It is a generalization used to predict the response of microorganisms to the medicines humans use to kill them.
The claim in the question stem is the conclusion; it is not a generalization. Further, the claim in the question stem is a claim about the existence of disease in the world, not a prediction about how microorganisms respond to medicine.
E
It is a conclusion that is claimed to follow from the premise that most microorganisms are immune to medicines designed to kill them.
(E) does correctly identify the claim in the question stem as a conclusion. However, the problem with medicines isn’t that the microorganisms that they are designed to kill are immune to them; instead, the problem with medicines is that microorganisms respond by becoming immune.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 117 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply