LSAT Explanation PT 33, S3, Q12: Some people claim that the reason

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following most accurately describes the argumentative technique used in the argument? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Method of Reasoning question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is A. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

First, let's analyze the argument in the passage. The argument can be summarized as follows:

1. Premise: Some people claim that herbs are not prescribed as drugs by licensed physicians because their medical effectiveness is in doubt.

2. Premise: No drug can be offered for sale without regulatory-agency approval, which costs about $200 million.

3. Premise: Only the holder of a patent can expect to recover such large expenses.

4. Premise: Herbs themselves and their medicinal uses cannot be patented.

5. Conclusion: Therefore, under the current system, licensed physicians cannot recommend the medicinal use of herbs.

The question type for this problem is Method of Reasoning (MOR), which asks us to identify the argumentative technique used in the argument.

Now, let's discuss the answer choices:

a) Questioning a claim about why something is the case by supplying an alternative explanation.

This answer choice accurately describes the argumentative technique used in the passage. The author questions the claim that herbs are not prescribed due to their medical effectiveness being in doubt and provides an alternative explanation, which is the inability to patent herbs and their medicinal uses. Therefore, this answer choice is correct.

b) Attacking the validity of the data on which a competing claim is based.

The author does not attack the validity of the data on which the competing claim is based. Instead, they provide an alternative explanation for why herbs are not prescribed as drugs. This answer choice is incorrect.

c) Revealing an inconsistency in the reasoning used to develop an opposing position.

The author does not reveal an inconsistency in the reasoning used to develop the opposing position. They simply provide an alternative explanation for why herbs are not prescribed as drugs. This answer choice is incorrect.

d) Identifying all plausible explanations for why something is the case and arguing that all but one of them can be eliminated.

The author does not identify all plausible explanations for why herbs are not prescribed as drugs; they only supply one alternative explanation. This answer choice is incorrect.

e) Testing a theory by determining the degree to which a specific situation conforms to the predictions of that theory.

The author does not test a theory or its predictions. Instead, they reject one theory in favor of another. This answer choice is incorrect.

In conclusion, the correct answer choice is (a) questioning a claim about why something is the case by supplying an alternative explanation.