- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8917
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:42 pm
#32477
Complete Question Explanation
Flaw in the Reasoning—CE. The correct answer choice is (E)
In this stimulus, the pediatrician makes a causal argument that begins with two causal premises. First, swollen tonsils cause breathing problems during sleep:
ST = swollen tonsils
BP = breathing problems during sleep
Cause Effect
ST 
BP
Next, we are told that surgical removal of swollen tonsils in children reduces their sleep disturbances. Although this term, “sleep disturbances” is more broad than the prior term of “breathing problems during sleep,” we can infer from the context that the reduction in sleep disturbances is related to the alleviation of the children’s breathing problems. To represent this connection, we can use the subscript BP:
RST = surgical removal of swollen tonsils
SD = reduction in sleep disturbances
.....RST SDBP
From this evidence, the pediatrician concludes that “removing children’s tonsils before swelling even occurs will ensure that the children do not experience any breathing problems during sleep.” At essence, this is a causal argument, but the word “ensures” evokes a conditional relationship. By casting this as a conditional relationship, the author is saying that if this one cause of breathing problems is removed, then children will have no breathing problems during sleep. This conclusion assumes without support that there are no other causes of sleeping problems, a manifestation of the central causal assumption LSAC makes concerning causal relationships on the LSAT, that there is one cause for each effect.
The question stem identifies this as a Flaw question. Our prephrase is that the pediatrician is making the assumption described above.
Answer choice (A): Although the author is identified as a pediatrician, the pediatrician’s argument does not make an appeal to authority.
Answer choice (B): This describes a circular argument. However, the conclusion is distinct from the premises, and does not make any assumptions that are logically identical to the conclusion.
Answer choice (C): The conclusion does not refer to the intent of those removing children’s tonsils before swelling even occurs (i.e., an “action”).
Answer choice (D): This is an attractive answer choice, because it comes close to the pediatrician’s error. However, the pediatrician does not conclude there is only one reason to remove a child’s tonsils.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice, because it describes the pediatrician’s reasoning error. By expressing the conclusion as a conditional relationship, the pediatrician implies that there are no other possible causes of breathing problems during sleep.
Flaw in the Reasoning—CE. The correct answer choice is (E)
In this stimulus, the pediatrician makes a causal argument that begins with two causal premises. First, swollen tonsils cause breathing problems during sleep:
ST = swollen tonsils
BP = breathing problems during sleep
Cause Effect ST BPNext, we are told that surgical removal of swollen tonsils in children reduces their sleep disturbances. Although this term, “sleep disturbances” is more broad than the prior term of “breathing problems during sleep,” we can infer from the context that the reduction in sleep disturbances is related to the alleviation of the children’s breathing problems. To represent this connection, we can use the subscript BP:
RST = surgical removal of swollen tonsils
SD = reduction in sleep disturbances
.....RST SDBPFrom this evidence, the pediatrician concludes that “removing children’s tonsils before swelling even occurs will ensure that the children do not experience any breathing problems during sleep.” At essence, this is a causal argument, but the word “ensures” evokes a conditional relationship. By casting this as a conditional relationship, the author is saying that if this one cause of breathing problems is removed, then children will have no breathing problems during sleep. This conclusion assumes without support that there are no other causes of sleeping problems, a manifestation of the central causal assumption LSAC makes concerning causal relationships on the LSAT, that there is one cause for each effect.
The question stem identifies this as a Flaw question. Our prephrase is that the pediatrician is making the assumption described above.
Answer choice (A): Although the author is identified as a pediatrician, the pediatrician’s argument does not make an appeal to authority.
Answer choice (B): This describes a circular argument. However, the conclusion is distinct from the premises, and does not make any assumptions that are logically identical to the conclusion.
Answer choice (C): The conclusion does not refer to the intent of those removing children’s tonsils before swelling even occurs (i.e., an “action”).
Answer choice (D): This is an attractive answer choice, because it comes close to the pediatrician’s error. However, the pediatrician does not conclude there is only one reason to remove a child’s tonsils.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice, because it describes the pediatrician’s reasoning error. By expressing the conclusion as a conditional relationship, the pediatrician implies that there are no other possible causes of breathing problems during sleep.