Q14

[geverett]

A, B, or E? Hmmmmm . . . . some tempting wrong answer choices on this RC section. Would love to hear more about this question.

[LSAT-Chang]

I was also down to (A) (B) and (E) and ultimately went with (E).. but now that I read that paragraph again, it seems to be doing more than just "describing differences" between the two illustrations as (E) suggests. It seems to be arguing for something, but I think (A) is wrong because it's not really arguing for a "greater usage" of the custom-made medical illustrations in court cases -- the author just seems to be arguing against these "opponents" and "lawyers" opinions about the cons of custom-made illustrations and trying to bring in the "pros" of such but not necessarily arguing that we should use it more often in court cases. I guess that leaves us with (B)............. but I'm not too happy.

[farhadshekib]

P2 attempts to undermine the criticism of custom made illustrations as misrepresenting facts in order to benefit one party, while P3 refutes the notion that the "illustration may subtly distort the issues through the use of...blah blah blah".

So, (B) is correct because P3 does address a variation of the objection mentioned in P2.

E was really tempting. I'd love to hear more on this,too.

[zainrizvi]

The purpose of the paragraph isn't really to describe. The tone, the structure are not neutral enough to simply "describe".

That being said, the paragraph isn't really strong enough to be ascribing something either - the author isn't really advocating for something here. Just showing that something is wrong.

That's why I was left with (B), as pointed out above, one paragraph talks about misrepresentation, the other about subtle distortion.

[ivankrasnov88]

In addition to Answer A being far too strong (as in the author isn't arguing for a greater use), I used the 'personal injury' bit to also knock this out.

If you notice, the third paragraph in no way focuses the scope on Personal Injury cases specifically.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

In addition to Answer A being far too strong (as in the author isn't arguing for a greater use), I used the 'personal injury' bit to also knock this out.

If you notice, the third paragraph in no way focuses the scope on Personal Injury cases specifically.

You know ivankrasnov88, I think I'd be okay with the part in answer choice (A) about personal injury.

Here's how I see the wrong answer choices eliminated:

(A) is unsupported. The author does not advocate for a "greater use" of custom made medical illustrations, but rather for the legitimacy of their use (lines 59-64).
(C) is close, but I see two issues (one I'd forgive). The minor one being that this is more the purpose of the passage, not the purpose of the 3rd paragraph. The greater error is that the claim is actually flipped around. Instead of saying "well suited" it should have said "not well suited".
(D) is too descriptive. The author is advocating a position here - the author is not "discussing". Maybe it happens (don't care), it's not the purpose of the paragraph.
(E) is too descriptive. The author is advocating a position here - the author is not "describing". Maybe it happens (don't care), it's not the purpose of the paragraph.

Hope that helps!

[kylelitfin]

I struggled with this question as well. I somewhat agreed and disagreed with why certain choices were wrong and B was correct, but I never was 100% until now.

In paragraph two, the author is mainly concerned with complaints concerning the misrepresentation of facts in custom-made illustrations (LN 17-18) for a few reasons.

Paragraph three takes this idea and runs with it in the first portion but then dives into this idea that medical textbooks can be confusing THUS a (good) reason for using custom illustrations is that one could display the specific parts of the body in discussion without all of the unnecessary detail.

The author never goes as far as to advocate for custom illustration, but he does a pretty decent job of displaying a good reason as to why custom illustrations could be useful to a case. He takes the complaint of misrepresentation brought up in the previous paragraph and suggests this is actually to the benefit of the judge and jury. (LN 41-46).

Once I connected these ideas, B became the obvious choice (don't they always retrospectively?)

Honestly this question was really important to me because it highlighted how I was not efficiently connecting the progression of ideas in the RC section. I should have notated that paragraph 3 was providing an alternative explanation for the alleged misrepresentation in paragraph 2.

I hope this helps somebody because it really changed the way I read the RC section and I have been doing much better as a result.

[csunnerberg13]

(C) is close, but I see two issues (one I'd forgive). The minor one being that this is more the purpose of the passage, not the purpose of the 3rd paragraph. The greater error is that the claim is actually flipped around. Instead of saying "well suited" it should have said "not well suited".

Wondering if you could clarify this a little bit - I thought C, as worded, basically says he's disagreeing with the idea that they are well-suited. How would replacing "well suited" with "not well suited" correct it? In the passage, he seems to be arguing they are not well-suited, and therefore AGAINST the idea that they are well-suited...

[Amir.m.shoar]

(C) is close, but I see two issues (one I'd forgive). The minor one being that this is more the purpose of the passage, not the purpose of the 3rd paragraph. The greater error is that the claim is actually flipped around. Instead of saying "well suited" it should have said "not well suited".

Wondering if you could clarify this a little bit - I thought C, as worded, basically says he's disagreeing with the idea that they are well-suited. How would replacing "well suited" with "not well suited" correct it? In the passage, he seems to be arguing they are not well-suited, and therefore AGAINST the idea that they are well-suited...

I'm having trouble with this as well. To me, it seems that "argue against the position that illustrations from medical textbooks are well suited for use in the courtroom" is basically like saying "the author believes that medical textbooks are not well suited for use in the courtroom", which is exactly what this passage is saying.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Notice that the beginning of the 3rd paragraph what some people maintain: "custom-made illustrations may subtly distort the issues" (lines 30-31).

The author disagrees with this view and flips around the argument beginning on line 33. The author is advocating for custom-made illustrations in the 3rd paragraph, not against them. To confirm this, look at the correct answer to Q10, which is answer choice (E). The author believes that custom-made illustrations are less likely to confuse jurors than illustrations in medical textbooks (i.e., the author has a positive view of custom-made illustrations for the courtroom).

Hope that helps!

[1191893369]

In addition to Answer A being far too strong (as in the author isn't arguing for a greater use), I used the 'personal injury' bit to also knock this out.

If you notice, the third paragraph in no way focuses the scope on Personal Injury cases specifically.

You know ivankrasnov88, I think I'd be okay with the part in answer choice (A) about personal injury.


(C) is close, but I see two issues (one I'd forgive). The minor one being that this is more the purpose of the passage, not the purpose of the 3rd paragraph. The greater error is that the claim is actually flipped around. Instead of saying "well suited" it should have said "not well suited".

Hope that helps!

I still cannot understand what you said about C. I think the problem of C is not the part about "are well suited"/"are not well suited", but the whole paragraph 3 is about to defend custom-made illustration against the complaint that illustration may subtly distort the issue.

[allisonellen7]

LSAT Geek is incorrect here about choice C. He/she has read incorrectly. C states that the author is arguing against the position that illustrations from MEDICAL TEXTBOOKS[u][/u] are well-suited for use in the courtroom. LSAT Geek is thinking that it stated "custom-made illustrations" instead of "illustrations from medical textbooks." The author is not necessarily arguing for or against the position that illustrations from medical textbooks are well-suited for use in the courtroom, but he is arguing that custom-made illustrations are well-suited, which is what LSAT Geek thought would be a good answer (C flipped around, and referring to "custom-made illustrations" instead of "illustrations from medical textbooks"). Just thought I should clarify! Thanks!

[mornincounselor]

I found choice C persuasive. It certainly seems the author's purpose to argue against the use of medical textbooks. I point to Line 39-40 about the limited scope of the custom-made illustrations, line 43 "the end user …, line 47 [these redundant elements] "would only get in the way."

[ohthatpatrick]

Just to clarify, you guys were right about Matt's explanation for (C). He did get turned around there.

to the current poster's question ....
it's true that people who DON'T like custom illustrations DO think that textbook illustrations are adequate.

and it's true that the author mentions some ways in which custom illustrations can be superior to textbook illustrations.

But is the author's purpose in this paragraph or this passage to say, "GET THOSE textbook illustrations OUT of the courtroom!"

Of course not. The author's goal, we can tell from his big picture sentences, is to DEFEND the use of custom illustrations, not to ATTACK the use of textbook ones.

So (C) has some matchable truth to it, but it can't be the best answer to the question, when a different answer better embodies the purpose of the not only this paragraph but also the entire passage.

---- as an aside ...
What helps me lock into (B) much more quickly is that PURPOSE OF A PARAGRAPH questions, almost without exception, provide a correct answer that paraphrases the first couple sentences of the paragraph.

They tend to only ask this question when the topic sentence of the paragraph is revealing about what the paragraph intends to discuss.

So since the matchable support for (C) is coming from within the details of the paragraph, whereas the matchable support for (B) comes from the topic sentence headline, I find (B) to be a much more likely correct answer from the start.

[maria487]

I was similarly tempted by answer choice (C), but what was really sticking out to me about it is its use of the word "well". I don't know if I agree that the author's purpose was to say that medical textbooks are not well suited for use in court, but rather that custom illustrations are better.

Is there any merit to my reasoning?

[ohthatpatrick]

There is DEFINITELY merit to that idea. Our author isn't saying that medical textbooks are unusable, just that custom illustrations have at least some advantages by removing irrelevant details.

While there's great merit to that nuance (and you could certainly use it), make sure you also see how even a tweaked version of (C) would be thought of as too narrow, not the overall purpose, in LSAT's mind.

This paragraph, and thus this answer, should still be focused on custom illustrations, not textbook ones.

Nice addition!

[huskybins]

My opinion as to why C is incorrect is totally different from all the other replies above.

The first sentence of the third paragraph lists an argument (that custom-made illustrations distorts the issues) with three pieces of supportive evidence: the use of emphasis, coloration and other means in custom-made illustrations.

Obviously, the second sentence line 34 "But ... " before "Unlike" in line 36 is to refute the validity of the second evidence "coloration".

The rest of the 3rd para, however, is against the issue of "emphasis": the opponent argues that placing emphasis on custom-made illustrations distorts the issues, while the author here argues such an "emphasis-placing" is a merit rather than weakness in custom-made illustrations: One, medical books provides detailed information but without any focus on the issue related to a case -- "because (medical books) are designed to include the extensive detail required by medical students"; second, the author boasts the merit on the contrary to the medical books that custom-made illustrations has such kind of focus on the case itself, and thus benefits the jury and the judge.

Of course the author did not make any rejoinder against "other means".

So from the above, I think why C is incorrect is it only states a partial reason of the third paragraph while ignore the overall purpose of this para.

[JonathanJ287]

Did anyone choose (D) and why? It could be a plausible answer given the second paragraph discusses complaints of custom-made illustrations and the author points out in this paragraph the controversy surrounding the issue of illustrations.

In fact, the third paragraph starts out with," It has ALSO been maintained.." , which seems to further expand on the second paragraph rather than reply to the variant of objection as with choice (B). Also, choice (D) provides examples and further detail that provide clarity to the controversy discussed in the 2nd paragraph.

Why would choice (B) be a better answer as compared to (D)?

[XiaoyanJ307]

I don't understand why B is correct.

Paragraph 2 and paragraph 3 seems separated to me.

Though in paragraph 2, there are objection to custom-made medical illustration, saying that custom-made medical illustration might misrepresent the fact, it is already objected by the last sentence in paragraph 2, "But this is mistaken. Even if an unscrupulous illustrator coulee be found, such illustrations would be inadmissible as evidence in the courtroom unless a medical expert were present to testify to their accuracy."

It seems to me that the objection of custom-made illustration in paragraph 2 is about misrepresentation or deception, while the objection in paragraph 3 is about emphasis and use of coloration.

Those looks like two separate point, since the first sentence in paragraph 3 says "It has ALSO been maintained that custom-made illustration ma subtly distort the issues through the use of...".
And the rest of paragraph 3 seems just replying to the new objection mentioned in the furs sentence in paragraph 3.

May someone please help me to understand this?

[hzj184]

The passage basically said custom-made illustrations (CMI) are good (well suited), which cannot in turn mean medical textbook illustrations(MTI) are not well suited.

It could be CMIs are good, as well as MTIs are good.