Q8

[rbolden]

Why is A the wrong answer?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Tough passage... It's not necessarily that the information is so difficult to understand, but some of the answer choices to the questions of this passage are really close! I think that's why you're having difficulty with this one.

8. Which one of the following most accurately describes the organization of the material presented in the passage?

(A) is correct up until the very end. The problem is that we aren't really given modifications or suggestions on how to best amend the Hippocratic Oath, but rather just the suggestion that we should amend the Hippocratic Oath. Also, calling the oath a principle is not as close as calling it code of conduct [answer choice (E)].
(B) is on the wrong side of the scale. There is not a dismissal of the reply to the criticisms.
(C) is wrong at the end. There is no set of modifications suggested at the end of the passage.
(D) is wrong when it says that the criticisms are rejected. There is a suggestion at the end that in light of the criticisms, there should be some modification of the Hippocratic Oath, but those criticisms are not wholly rejected in the final paragraph.
(E) matches the organization of the passage.

[shirando21]

do you mean that in A the part "in light of these cricisms" is incorrect?

[schmid215]

Not sure (A) is as strong as your analysis would suggest...1. The Hippocratic Oath isn't a "general principle", it's a set of principles 2. Criticisms of the "principle" aren't "made", they're mentioned and evaluated

[mitrakhanom1]

I picked the incorrect answer choice A, but I have a hard time seeing why E is better. I agree principle is not the best word to describe the hippocratic oath but the reason why i liked answer choice A was because it included key words like criticisms and modifications which in my mind help summarize the passage. I eliminated E because it mentioned its a general defense of the code is presented. I don't believe that the code is entirely or generally defended because it mentions it needs modifications. When I read "modifications of the principle are made" in choice A, i interpreted that to mean suggestions were made, not literal alterations were done. I guess I made too many leaps in logic and assumptions for answer choice A, but something didn't sound right about answer choice E. Help please!

[christine.defenbaugh]

I picked the incorrect answer choice A, but I have a hard time seeing why E is better. I agree principle is not the best word to describe the hippocratic oath but the reason why i liked answer choice A was because it included key words like criticisms and modifications which in my mind help summarize the passage. I eliminated E because it mentioned its a general defense of the code is presented. I don't believe that the code is entirely or generally defended because it mentions it needs modifications. When I read "modifications of the principle are made" in choice A, i interpreted that to mean suggestions were made, not literal alterations were done. I guess I made too many leaps in logic and assumptions for answer choice A, but something didn't sound right about answer choice E. Help please!

Great questions! It's tough to distinguish (A) and (E) here.

On a structural question like this, it's critical to keep track of who is on which side of the scale - in other words, pay attention to the verbs of the answer choices! Is the author making these criticisms him or herself? Or is the author merely mentioning the criticisms of others? Is the author actually modifying the code in the passage? Or is the author merely proposing that the code could be modified (at the periphery)?

Laying out (A) and (E) side by side we have:

(A) A general principle is described
(E) The tradition surrounding a certain code of conduct is discussed

Lines 1-12 of the passage lay out the history of the Hippocractic oath, which matches up nicely with (E). While the "moral precepts embodied" in it are mentioned, we don't get a sense of what they are until lines 8-10, and then only in an aside of 'for example' - it's a bit harder to match this with a general principle being described (A).

(A) criticisms of the principle are made
(E) criticisms of that code are mentioned

Lines 13-33 lay out the criticisms of the oath - but whose criticisms are these? There are a number of signals that tell us that these criticisms are not coming directly from the author: "critics are that", "some critics believe", "the oath is also faulted for", "some respected opponents even". We don't have a clear author viewpoint on these criticisms until the second paragraph. It is therefore hard to justify (A) - while criticisms are certainly mentioned, it's not clear that it is the author who is making those criticisms.

(A) modifications of the principle are made in light of these criticisms
(E) a general defense of the code is presented

In the second paragraph the author responds to the criticisms mentioned above by dismissing the historical criticism. Then the author goes on to note that "the more substantive...arguments...cannot negate" an important patient need (which is fulfilled by the code), and claims that the "core value of beneficence...should be retained." In other words, the author acknowledges the criticisms, but defends the code's core in spite of them. This is the general defense of the core that (E) matches.

While modifications are mentioned briefly, the author merely acknowledges that "adaptations at the oath's periphery" are acceptable, so long as the "core value" of the code is retained. More significantly, the author does not actually make any modifications him- or herself, which (A) would require.


When addressing a structural question, it is not enough that the what of the answer match (criticisms, modifications), but also the who - who is making the criticisms, and how does the author fit into that conversation?

I hope this helps clear things up a bit!