Logical Reasoning

PT109 · S1 · Q13 Ethicist: Studies have documented the

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

Ethicist: Studies have documented the capacity of placebos to reduce pain in patients who believe that they are receiving beneficial drugs.

Conclusion

Administering placebos is nonetheless ethically questionable.

Evidence

Even if a placebo benefits a patient, a doctor might have prescribed it just to give the patient the satisfaction that something was being done.

Evaluate

If we were just trying to prephrase a Missing Link assumption to connect Premise language to Conclusion language we'd get

prescribed a placebo just to give the → ethically questionable patient satisfaction

If we were trying to make an objection that "administering placebos is ethically fine", we might say,

Goal

Look for an answer saying , or an answer that, if negated, would allow us to argue that administering placebos is ethically fine.

13.

The ethicist's argument depends on which one of the following assumptions?

  1. A patient’s psychological satisfaction is

    Too Strong

    The author is definitely assuming it's not the only consideration, or else she'd probably be okay with administering a placebo in order to appease the patient's psychological satisfaction. But our author doesn't have to assume it's not a consideration at all. If we negate this and say that patient psychological consideration is a consideration, that doesn't do much to say that this is therefore ethically questionable.

    22% picked this

  2. Correct

    The motivation for administering a

    Why this is right

    This is lovably weak since it's just saying "can be relevant". That means that when we negate it, we'll get a very powerful idea. Does this negation hurt the argument: the motivation for why you administer a placebo can never be relevant to the ethical justification for administering it. Yes! The author is saying, "it's questionable whether administering a placebo would be ethically justifiable if a doctor is prescribing it with the motivation of just trying to give the patient satisfaction that something was being done." If the motivation for administering a placebo has no relevance to whether it's ethically justified, then the author's argument would just fall apart.

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

    65% picked this

  3. Medical treatment that relies on

    Too Strong: indefensible

    The author is only saying that the placebo treatment is questionable, not indefensible.

    7% picked this

  4. The pain relief produced by

    Opposite

    The author is ethically uneasy about giving a placebo in certain circumstances, even if it does provide pain relief. This answer is saying "the deception is justified!" That sounds like someone who is ethically comfortable with placebos, not like our author.

    3% picked this

  5. Administering a placebo is not

    Out of Scope

    Out of Scope: not prescribed by a doctor Even though this answer seems pretty plausible, it's not covered by the argument. The author is only talking about doctors prescribing placebos. We don't know what this person would think about someone else administering a placebo.

    2% 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