Logical Reasoning

PT153 · S2 · Q19 Trainer: An athlete developed lower back pain

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

Trainer: An athlete developed lower back pain after a strenuous athletic competition.

Conclusion

Using a heating pad is generally more effective at relieving lower back pain than stretching is.

Evidence

An athlete injured her lower back after a strenuous competition. She tried stretching for a few days but the pain persisted. She then used a heating pad, and within a few days the pain was gone.

Evaluate

Since part of this argument involves a Causal Interpretation of a before/after, we can use our Curious Fact / Explanation mindset.

Curious Fact Why did the pain not go away after several days of stretching but did go away a few days after using a heating pad?

Author's Story Stretching isn't as good at relieving lower back pain, whereas the heating pad is more effective and so that's why the stretching didn't relieve the pain but the heating pad did.

When Curious Fact and Flaw intersect, we're just supposed to be pointing out that the author is too sure of his explanation. It's possible that stretching didn't work and the heating pad did, but aren't there other possible ways to interpret that data?

- maybe stretching works, but it takes a few days before it the effects can be seen - maybe the pain just went away on its own, and the heating pad was just a coincidence

The other aspect of this argument that could be critiqued is that the conclusion gets way more broad than just the case of the athlete. It says that heating pads are generally more effective.

Now we have Sampling concerns --- maybe what happened with this athlete was not typical or general. Maybe the type or severity of the injury she suffered isn't typical. Maybe her body's response to stretching vs. heating pad is atypical.

Goal

Get rid of four valid complaints with the argument. They will probably be a mix of alternate explanations for why the pain ultimately disappeared and possible objections to the sampling generalization that's made.

19.

The trainer's argument is vulnerable to criticism on each of the following grounds except:

  1. Correct

    It fails to consider that

    Why this is right

    It will always be wrong to say "fails to consider that even if [the Conclusion] is true". The conclusion is only about whether or not heating pads are better at relieving pain (not about whether they're better at healing the underlying injury). So in the first half of this answer choice, we are awarding this author the victory, rather than resisting the conclusion he is trying to draw.

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

    72% picked this

  2. It fails to consider the

    Alternate Explanation

    This is saying, "Maybe the heating pad wasn't why the pain went away; lower back pain from a sports injury often just goes away on its own after a handful of days".

    9% picked this

  3. It fails to consider that

    Unrepresentative Sample

    This answer calls out the Sampling move in the conclusion. Even if we grant that a heating pad was more effective for this athlete, that wouldn't show that heating pads are generally more effective, because her experience may have been atypical.

    9% picked this

  4. It overlooks the possibility that

    Unrepresentative Sample

    This answer calls out the Sampling move in the conclusion. Even if we grant that a heating pad was more effective for this athlete, that wouldn't show that heating pads are generally more effective, because her injury may have been one that was more conducive to heating pads than other injuries would have been.

    5% picked this

  5. It overlooks the possibility that

    Alternative Explanation

    This is objecting that "heating pads are not generally more effective than stretching — the reason that stretching failed in her case is just because she didn't try the right form of stretching, which would have been much more effective."

    5% 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