Logical Reasoning

PT18 · S4 · Q17 Dr. Kim: Electronic fetal monitors

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

Dr. Kim: Electronic fetal monitors, now routinely used in hospital delivery rooms to check fetal heartbeat, are more intrusive than ordinary stethoscopes and do no more to improve the chances that a healthy baby will be born.

Conclusion

The cost of electronic monitoring is justified, and we should continue using the monitoring.

Evidence

Even though stethoscopes are capable of providing the same information that EFM's are, we learned the sort of stuff we should be listening for with stethoscopes by using EFM's.

Evaluate

If we were trying to defend Dr. Kim and say that electronic monitoring should not be used anymore, we could probably say,

Goal

Look for an answer that says something like, or .

17.

As a reply to Dr. Kim’s argument, Dr. Anders’ response is inadequate because it

  1. Correct

    misses the point at issue

    Why this is right

    This is one we might mainly get to by working backwards through elimination. If the first person's point was that stethoscopes provide just-as-good info but are cheaper and less intrusive, then the second person didn't say anything to dispute that. She acknowledges even that the two methods provide equivalent information. She doesn't dispute that these more intrusive / expensive electronic monitors don't do anything to improve the chances of a healthy baby. When an author offers an essentially irrelevant response, LSAT will sometimes say that they "failed to address the argument / missed the point at issue".

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

    73% picked this

  2. assumes what it sets out

    Wrong Flaw

    All these expressions mean Circular Reasoning, and they are wrong answer choices over 95% of the time we see them. - assumes what it sets out to prove - presupposes what it seeks to establish - presumes the truth of the conclusion - conclusion is a restatement of the premise Circular arguments don't really have a premise. Their support is more or less a reiteration of the conclusion. But this argument does have a premise (electronic monitors helped us to learn warming signs we should be listening for). The fact that it's a crappy premise doesn't make this a circular argument.

    8% picked this

  3. confuses high cost with high

    Out of Scope: cost/quality

    Dr. A doesn't bring up the cost or the quality of electronic monitors.

    6% picked this

  4. overestimates the importance of technology

    Too Broad

    Dr. A isn't making any claims about modern medicine, so our logical complaint with her argument can't be that she's over-selling how important tech is to modern medicine.

    3% picked this

  5. overlooks the fact that a

    Too Strong: best

    Any time we see an answer choice structured like, overlooks the fact that X can be true without Y being true X should match the evidence, and Y should match the conclusion. This author's conclusion is not that electronic monitors are the best procedure available (and her premise isn't "after all, they're extensively used.")

    9% 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