Logical Reasoning

PT2 · S2 · Q7 There is no reason why

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

There is no reason why the work of scientists has to be officially confirmed before being published.

Conclusion

There is no reason scientists' work must be officially confirmed before publication.

Intermediate Conclusion

Poor scientific work by any one scientist, from careless reporting to fraud, is not harmful.

Evidence

A confirmation system already exists: other scientists replicate results.

Poor work will be exposed and rendered harmless when others run the experiments and get disconfirming results.

Evaluate

As the other lawyer in the room, we're trying to argue that there is a good reason why scientists' work must be officially confirmed before publication.

The author will say,

How do we respond to that?

I'd probably say,

What if some findings are published in such obscure places that other scientists never see it / never test it / never validate it?

What there would just be too many findings for scientists to verify them all?

Goal

Look for an answer that highlights a potential problem with just publishing scientific work before it's been confirmed.

The author thinks our safety net is the confirmatory testing of other scientists. The answer will probably point to a breakdown in that safety net (some published experiments would never get verified because _____ .)

Or it'll suggest that unconfirmed findings could do harm in the meantime, between when they are published and when they are eventually disconfirmed by other scientists.

7.

Which one of the following, if true, would weaken the argument?

  1. Correct

    Scientific experiments can go unchallenged

    Why this is right

    If experiments can sit unchallenged for years before anyone replicates them, then poor work is not promptly exposed + rendered harmless. During those many years, a false finding could mislead other researchers and anyone who relies on the published result. So there is a reason why we wait to confirm work before we publish it.

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

    88% picked this

  2. Most scientists work in universities,

    No Impact

    That peer review already happens at universities describes current practice; it does not show that such review is needed. The author is arguing about whether official confirmation is necessary, and the existence of a common practice neither strengthens nor weakens the author's idea that confirming before publishing has no value.

    5% picked this

  3. Most scientists are under pressure

    Opposite

    This basically strengthens by feeding into the author's story that the scientific community's scrutiny would protect us against unconfirmed published findings. Pressure to make work accessible to replication makes the replication system more effective, which supports the author. If scientists are pushed to expose their work to scrutiny, poor work is more likely to be caught, not less.

    5% picked this

  4. In scientific experiments, careless reporting

    Irrelevant Comparison

    The author lumps careless reporting and fraud together as poor work that replication will catch. Which of the two is more common makes no difference to whether replication catches either one in time.

    1% picked this

  5. Most scientists work as part

    No Impact

    Team science versus solo science has no bearing on whether it's safe to publish work before it's been confirmed. Team science is probably more likely to self-police and catch their own errors than a lone scientist, so if anything maybe this strengthens a little bit, because the author could reassure us that other scientists on the team would help ensure the accuracy of the published findings.

    1% 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