jimmy902o
Thanks Received: 4
Elle Woods
Elle Woods
 
Posts: 90
Joined: August 06th, 2011
 
 
 

Q15 - Health insurance insulates

by jimmy902o Tue Aug 16, 2011 7:19 pm

Im having a difficult time understanding this question. Dont understand why D is wrong and B is right. Help needed!
 
Raiderblue17
Thanks Received: 4
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 26
Joined: August 10th, 2011
 
 
 

Re: Q15 - Health insurance insulates

by Raiderblue17 Wed Aug 17, 2011 6:34 pm

So here is My rationale for thinking:

we conclude that Doctors over treat patients for the monetary gain that comes with it.

So let's go through each one

A: NO coincidence, these are doctors they do THEIR JOB
B: Correct: The author says the reason these doctors treat patients the way they do is for $$$ and it's their job.

HOW about they treat patients to... I don't know.. save lives and avoid being sued... Just sayin!
C: Just out of scope... Not
D: the author DOES discuss why choices are being made. He openly says they're for monetary gain. SO this can't be right
E: Irrelevant considerations? Multiple participants? NOPE!
User avatar
 
bbirdwell
Thanks Received: 864
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 803
Joined: April 16th, 2009
 
 
 

Re: Q15 - Health insurance insulates

by bbirdwell Fri Aug 19, 2011 11:02 am

I agree, (D) is simply a bad match for the argument. Oftentimes, questions like these are sort of like matching questions. Your job is to choose the one that best matches what happens in the argument.

In the original:
Facts:
doctors decide the course of treatment
doctors get paid per procedure

Conclusion:
doctors frequently call for treatment only to make $

The key words in the conclusion are, of course, frequently and only. This is where the author goes wrong, as we have no evidence for this.

(B) match it up!
"performance of actions" = "administering treatments"
The key language here is on no basis other than two things: incentive ($), and opportunity (sole discretion).

(D) We can stop at "arbitrarily" and eliminate the choice without reading any further. There's nothing arbitrary about it -- according to our author, they're in it for the money.
I host free online workshop/Q&A sessions called Zen and the Art of LSAT. You can find upcoming dates here: http://www.manhattanlsat.com/zen-and-the-art.cfm
 
justindebouvier7
Thanks Received: 1
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 14
Joined: March 24th, 2013
 
 
 

Re: Q15 - Health insurance insulates

by justindebouvier7 Fri Jun 21, 2013 6:43 pm

Hey Brian,
I got the correct answer but I want to make sure that I understand why I got it right and that it wasn't perhaps instead of just a lucky guess with bad reasoning.

C can be eliminated because it refers to principles which wasn't relevant to the argument.

D is incorrect because it mentions "arbitrary decisions" in addition to providing reasons which we don't necessarily need.

E is EXTREMELY OUT OF SCOPE.

However, my trouble with the problem came down between A & B.

B just seemed to be the better answer choice because I would think that a doctor would have other motives than just financial rewards. They could genuinely care about the patients and provide them with all the "medical procedures" necessary to gain their health as quickly as possible. The term "coincidentally" used in A just bugged me but I couldn't put my finger on how to get rid of it. Any further input will tremendously help!

Thank you.
User avatar
 
tommywallach
Thanks Received: 468
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 1041
Joined: August 11th, 2009
 
 
 

Re: Q15 - Health insurance insulates

by tommywallach Sun Jun 23, 2013 12:20 pm

Hey Justin,

Your thinking here was fantastic. I only have a couple things to add.

(E) is no worse than anything else. I'd prefer to eliminate because there aren't multiple participants in the decision, just the doctor and MAYBE the patient.

(A) is wrong for exactly the reason you said, and other reasons. First off, no responsibility is assigned to doctors. This is about the reason they may do a certain thing, not whether they're responsible for any particular result. But the biggest problem is the one you pointed out: coincidental. There is barely anything less coincidental than a doctor's involvement in treatment!

Hope that helps!

-t
Tommy Wallach
Manhattan LSAT Instructor
twallach@manhattanprep.com
Image