Q19 - Dr. Schilling: Those who advocate

[adarsh.murthy]

My first post, so appologise if I missed some rules.

I didnt understand why E is the answer?Reading the stimulus, it is not clear to me how Dr Shilling is limiting the use of the term "Access". Can anyone explain? I chose C, but I think I understand why it is wrong: I guess Laforte does not provide counterexample to undermine human costs arguement by Dr. Shilling.

Thanks

[giladedelman]

Thanks for your question.

The issue here is that for Schilling, "access" means the ability to buy whatever medicine you want/need if you can afford it, regardless of availability. Laforte points out that in a private insurance market, people who can't afford coverage are actually the ones who are denied access to the medical treatment they need; for Laforte, access means receiving coverage in practice, regardless of one's economic situation, rather than being free to purchase it if one has the money.

Does that answer your question, or is it still unclear?

As for the other choices:

(A) is incorrect because Laforte doesn't question the relevance of Schilling's objections, just their validity.

(B) is out because Laforte doesn't challenge Schilling's authority.

(C) is incorrect because, as you said, Laforte doesn't present any counterexamples.

(D) is out because there is nothing ambiguous about the use of the word "consumer."

[jeremygoldstein7]

I still don't understand why C is wrong. Is boasting of equal access to life-saving medical procedure not a counter-example to "high human costs"? If not, what would be an example of a counter-example?

[LeonC641]

Hi Manhatten Prep,

Even though I eventually got it correct, but I had a very hard time understanding how (E) could be the argumentative method that Laforte factually, literally employs.

My understanding of this question type is that the credited choice must reflect the actual method used. I understood that Laforte points out a different notion of what is people right to access treatments. Yet, which part of Laforte's reasoning could be understood as showing Schilling's claim "depends on" construing the key notion of access in a particular way?

In my probably mistaken perspective, for (E) to be a sound credited answer, Laborte should at least have said something like "your argument requires" or "assuming your understanding is true, then..."

Thanks!