- Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:00 am
#23480
Complete Question Explanation
Justify the Conclusion. The correct answer choice is (A)
This is a Justify the Conclusion question, so our task is to find the answer choice that ends the argument in favor of the conclusion and without any vulnerability. Understanding the structure of the argument, both the conclusion and the premises, is of fundamental importance.
First, the conclusion: the author is driving the argument toward the idea that straight-handled rakes carry a lower risk of spinal injury than the new rakes with S-shaped handles. This conclusion is a mouthful, but it ends up being so specific that a precise reader will have an easy time weeding out loser answer choices. The premises revolve around how the different rakes affect the spine when used. The third sentence lets provides a baselines for comparison because if we stick with the straight-handled rake, neither our push stroke nor our pull stroke will put us in danger of spinal injury. The S-shaped handle of the new rake provides somewhat of a tradeoff: the pull stroke is five times less dangerous (stressful) than the baseline, but the push stroke is five times more dangerous. In fact, this five-fold stress increase now means that we are endangering our spines with every push of the S-shaped rake. Certainly we now have one reason to follow the familiar adage: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
We must keep in mind that this is a Justify the Conclusion question and, as such, will have a very rigid, infallible argument structure. The premises combine with the correct answer choice so that the conclusion that straight-handled rakes are better than S-shaped rakes at minimizing risk of spinal injury is unavoidable. How can we make this so? We may think that we have already shown this by noting that the push stroke is just too violent with the S-shaped rake. Yet, as active readers, we should wonder if pushing and pulling are the only considerations. Are there other ways to injure the spine? Sure there are, and the fact that we are considering rakes makes our job that much more enjoyable. Imagine someone injuring his or her spine stepping on a straight-handled rake, which flies up to strike the person's vertebrae. Now imagine someone stepping on an S-shaped rake and imagine that the rake's handle actually conforms to the curve of the person's spine without doing any damage (perhaps even improving posture!). This may be silly, but the rigorous nature of a Justify the Conclusion question dictates that the correct answer choice rules out such possibilities.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice because the word "only" shuts down any consideration beyond how the rakes compare when pushed. Even pulling is no longer a factor. Here we see a great example of the black-and-white nature of a Justify the Conclusion question. We know that the S-shaped rake loses to the straight-handled rake in terms of pushing. With this answer choice, we consider nothing else and are able to draw an airtight conclusion. With this answer choice, we are precluded from considering a world in which people injure their spines through amusing accidents or anything else we might conjure up.
Answer choice (B): This answer choice can be quickly discarded if we remain aware of just how well-defined our task is. In this particular Justify the Conclusion question, our focus is within the causes of gardening spine injury, not on how frequently spine injuries occur. We are trying to say that the data on pushing and pulling is all that we need to know when choosing between rake types on the basis of spinal injury. Therefore, the ideally efficient response to this answer choice is as follows: "So?"
Answer choice (C): This answer choice would support the phenomenon we see with the S-shaped handle, but our task requires so much more. We have to find something that rules out any possibility of the S-shaped rake being a better choice for one's spine. Not only does this answer not mention spinal injury, but it also does not advance the argument.
Answer choice (D): This could be a very tempting answer choice, but it can be removed quickly if we are paying attention. Virtually all readers are going to notice that only one of the two stroke types runs into the danger zone with the S-shaped rake. The LSAT writers are trying to catch us off guard by switching the critical stroke. If this answer choice was taken as true, it would not matter because we would want 100% push strokes anyway. If we decided to use the S-shaped rake, we would want 100% pull — the safer stroke — for the sake of our spines. But EVEN IF we managed to use the S-shaped rake without push strokes, we have not ruled out the possibility of hurting our spine in a number of other ways. We could have discarded this answer choice simply on the basis that we needed to exclude any factors other than stroke type, but it is helpful also to see exactly what this answer choice is trying to do with its wording.
Answer choice (E): We should have a laser-like focus in regards to the parts of this argument and the mechanics of a Justify the Conclusion question. With such a focus, we can realize that any facts that do not pertain to the differences between straight-handled and S-shaped rakes will be completely useless.
Justify the Conclusion. The correct answer choice is (A)
This is a Justify the Conclusion question, so our task is to find the answer choice that ends the argument in favor of the conclusion and without any vulnerability. Understanding the structure of the argument, both the conclusion and the premises, is of fundamental importance.
First, the conclusion: the author is driving the argument toward the idea that straight-handled rakes carry a lower risk of spinal injury than the new rakes with S-shaped handles. This conclusion is a mouthful, but it ends up being so specific that a precise reader will have an easy time weeding out loser answer choices. The premises revolve around how the different rakes affect the spine when used. The third sentence lets provides a baselines for comparison because if we stick with the straight-handled rake, neither our push stroke nor our pull stroke will put us in danger of spinal injury. The S-shaped handle of the new rake provides somewhat of a tradeoff: the pull stroke is five times less dangerous (stressful) than the baseline, but the push stroke is five times more dangerous. In fact, this five-fold stress increase now means that we are endangering our spines with every push of the S-shaped rake. Certainly we now have one reason to follow the familiar adage: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
We must keep in mind that this is a Justify the Conclusion question and, as such, will have a very rigid, infallible argument structure. The premises combine with the correct answer choice so that the conclusion that straight-handled rakes are better than S-shaped rakes at minimizing risk of spinal injury is unavoidable. How can we make this so? We may think that we have already shown this by noting that the push stroke is just too violent with the S-shaped rake. Yet, as active readers, we should wonder if pushing and pulling are the only considerations. Are there other ways to injure the spine? Sure there are, and the fact that we are considering rakes makes our job that much more enjoyable. Imagine someone injuring his or her spine stepping on a straight-handled rake, which flies up to strike the person's vertebrae. Now imagine someone stepping on an S-shaped rake and imagine that the rake's handle actually conforms to the curve of the person's spine without doing any damage (perhaps even improving posture!). This may be silly, but the rigorous nature of a Justify the Conclusion question dictates that the correct answer choice rules out such possibilities.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice because the word "only" shuts down any consideration beyond how the rakes compare when pushed. Even pulling is no longer a factor. Here we see a great example of the black-and-white nature of a Justify the Conclusion question. We know that the S-shaped rake loses to the straight-handled rake in terms of pushing. With this answer choice, we consider nothing else and are able to draw an airtight conclusion. With this answer choice, we are precluded from considering a world in which people injure their spines through amusing accidents or anything else we might conjure up.
Answer choice (B): This answer choice can be quickly discarded if we remain aware of just how well-defined our task is. In this particular Justify the Conclusion question, our focus is within the causes of gardening spine injury, not on how frequently spine injuries occur. We are trying to say that the data on pushing and pulling is all that we need to know when choosing between rake types on the basis of spinal injury. Therefore, the ideally efficient response to this answer choice is as follows: "So?"
Answer choice (C): This answer choice would support the phenomenon we see with the S-shaped handle, but our task requires so much more. We have to find something that rules out any possibility of the S-shaped rake being a better choice for one's spine. Not only does this answer not mention spinal injury, but it also does not advance the argument.
Answer choice (D): This could be a very tempting answer choice, but it can be removed quickly if we are paying attention. Virtually all readers are going to notice that only one of the two stroke types runs into the danger zone with the S-shaped rake. The LSAT writers are trying to catch us off guard by switching the critical stroke. If this answer choice was taken as true, it would not matter because we would want 100% push strokes anyway. If we decided to use the S-shaped rake, we would want 100% pull — the safer stroke — for the sake of our spines. But EVEN IF we managed to use the S-shaped rake without push strokes, we have not ruled out the possibility of hurting our spine in a number of other ways. We could have discarded this answer choice simply on the basis that we needed to exclude any factors other than stroke type, but it is helpful also to see exactly what this answer choice is trying to do with its wording.
Answer choice (E): We should have a laser-like focus in regards to the parts of this argument and the mechanics of a Justify the Conclusion question. With such a focus, we can realize that any facts that do not pertain to the differences between straight-handled and S-shaped rakes will be completely useless.