Logical Reasoning

PT106 · S1 · Q4 Dental researcher: Filling a cavity

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Dental researcher: Filling a cavity in a tooth is not a harmless procedure: it inevitably damages some of the healthy parts of the tooth.

Conclusion (therefore)

If the nerves inside the tooth aren't in imminent danger from a cavity, then dentists should not fill a cavity.

Evidence

Filling a cavity inevitably damages some of the healthy parts of a tooth.

A cavity is only harmful if the decay reaches the nerves inside the tooth and many cavities left untreated would never get there.

Evaluate

This argument feels like it's Weighing Tradeoffs, so we might be less likely to see the typical "If Evidence, then Conclusion" form of most correct Strengthen+Principle answers.

Should we or shouldn't we fill a cavity?

Filling it would provide the positive on reassuring us that we're protecting against the potential harm it could cause if the decay reaches the nerves inside the tooth.

But filling it would provide inevitable harm to some healthy parts of the tooth. And it's possible that the cavity itself would have never caused harm.

Goal

Look for something like, .

4.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most strongly supports the researcher's reasoning?

  1. Dentists should perform any procedure

    Bad Conclusion Match

    As soon as we see this rule would tell a dentist that they should perform a procedure, we know it's a bad match for justifying our conclusion, which is saying that a dentist shouldn't perform a procedure. This rule is saying, If procedure is likely to be beneficial long-term dentist should and → perform the doesn't cause immediate procedure damage

    9% picked this

  2. Dentists should help their patients

    Bad Conclusion Match

    As soon as we see this rule would tell a dentist that they should help patients prevent, we know it's a bad match for justifying our conclusion, which is saying that a dentist shouldn't perform a procedure.

    2% picked this

  3. Correct

    A condition that is only

    Why this is right

    This is saying if condition is only → should not be treated w/ potentially harmful method that's def harmful The conclusion is talking about situations in which the nerves are not in imminent danger from a cavity. Is a cavity that's not imminently threatening nerves a condition that is "only potentially harmful"? Sure, it said that "many cavities never progress to the point of reaching the nerves inside the tooth, and thus that many cavities are not harmful". Is filling a cavity "a method that is definitely harmful"? Yes, we're told that filling a cavity "inevitably damages some of the healthy parts of the tooth". So this rule applies to cavities that haven't reached the nerve and applies to the method of filling cavities, and it counsels us that we shouldn't use the method of filling cavities when we have the condition of an only potentially harmful cavity, which matches our conclusion.

    Skill tested: Principle-Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    85% picked this

  4. A condition that is typically

    Bad Evidence/Conclusion Match

    Can we say that having a cavity is a condition that is "typically progressive"? No, we don't know whether cavities usually / typically / most of the time progress. Can we call filling cavities a method that "provides only temporary relief"? No, the paragraph never said that the relief provided by filling a cavity eventually goes away.

    1% picked this

  5. A condition that is potentially

    Bad Conclusion Match

    As soon as we see this rule would say we should not leave a cavity untreated, we know it's a bad match for justifying our conclusion, which is saying that a dentist shouldn't treat the cavity. This answer says If a potentially harmful then the condition condition can't be kept → should be under constant surveillance treated

    3% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free