Logical Reasoning

PT145 · S2 · Q16 Some people see no harm

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

Some people see no harm in promoting a folk remedy that in fact has no effect.

Conclusion

There is harm in promoting a folk remedy that has no effect.

Evidence

People who are convinced to use an ineffective remedy continue with it for years rather than pursuing conventional treatments that would almost certainly help them.

Evaluate

We know that the rule we select needs to help us prove that "doing X is harmful" or some equivalent synonym.

Why is promoting folk remedies harmful?

It's not literally harmful, because the remedy has no effect, but it steers people away from treatments that would probably help.

So we're defining "harm" as "directed you away from something that would help".

Goal

Look for an answer saying something like,

16.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the reasoning in the argument?

  1. One should not promote a

    Bad Conclusion/Premise Match

    The conclusion this rule is set up for is, "Therefore, you shouldn't promote folk remedies", which is very different from proving "Therefore, promoting folk remedies is harmful". Someone can prove to me that playing football is harmful but still not be saying to be "you shouldn't play football". Two separate issues. Additionally, the trigger of this rule doesn't match the premise. We're never told that the people promoting folk remedies believe that using those remedies will cause harm.

    6% picked this

  2. Correct

    It is harmful to interfere

    Why this is right

    This is structurally appealing because it says, "If you're doing ____ , it's harmful". Is promoting folk remedies "interfering with someone doing something that is likely to benefit them"? Yeah, we could make that language work. If we convince people to use folk remedies, they will often use them for years instead of pursuing conventional treatments that would likely (almost certainly) help them.

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

    61% picked this

  3. To convince people of something

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This rule is set up to prove "Thus, doing this thing is dishonest", but we're looking to support a conclusion that says "Thus, doing this thing is harmful".

    4% picked this

  4. A person is responsible for

    Bad Premise Match

    This principle helps one to conclude that "Person X is responsible for the harm, even if the harm was done unintentionally". Can we apply this to promoting folk remedies? Is there unintentional harm done? Not as far as we know from the argument. The folk remedy has no effect, so it's not directly harmful. If we're thinking it's indirectly harmful because it's chasing people away from better treatments, well then we just made a big assumption of our own, and that assumption is exactly what this question is testing and what (B) is rewarding. This principle is trying to support an argument that sounds like, "Ted hurt Reggie's feelings, although Ted didn't mean to. Nonetheless, Ted is still responsible for hurting Reggie's feelings."

    9% picked this

  5. A person who convinces someone

    Too Weak

    We want to try to support / prove the idea that promoting a folk remedy causes harm. This rule doesn't even mention harm, so it is very unappealing at first glance. Applying this rule to promoters of folk remedies, we would get that the promoter is in part responsible for the fact that the person they convinced would probably avoid conventional treatments for years. Okay ... but was that harm? We might think so in our own minds, but this answer nor the paragraph has ever established that steering someone away from helpful treatments constitutes harm.

    19% 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