June 2017 LSAT Section 3 Question 11

A new treatment for muscle pain that looked very promising was tested in three separate studies. Although the results...

lerondagates on November 20, 2019

How is the Answer A?

Hello, I read the passage a few times and can't really understand why the answer is A. We know the results were positive and the studies were flawed, so the treatment is probably not effective. Answer choice A says that the judges did not have uniform criteria. Is this the parallel methodological flaw we found in the passage? So, because the judges did not have uniform criteria, their winner (treatment) is flawed, or is a bad one? Thanks in advance.

Replies

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Irina on November 20, 2019

@lerondagates,

The issue with the argument in the stimulus is that it concludes that just because the process/ methodology for testing the effectiveness of the treatment is flawed, the result is also flawed. This is a logical fallacy as it is possible for a flawed process to produce an accurate result. (A) exhibits a similar flaw - since the judges did not have a uniform criteria, i.e. the process is flawed - thus, the cake that won must be a bad one. Surely, even if the judges were using inconsistent criteria, a tasty cake could have won.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

lerondagates on November 20, 2019

Yes, I get it now. Thanks for the clarification. I missed that totally.