91Ó°ÊÓ

The mayor boasts that the average ambulance turnaround time, the time from summons to delivery of the patient, has been reduced this year for top- prionity emergencies. This a serious misrepresentation. This "reduction" was produced simply by redefining "top priority." Such emergencies used to include gunshot wounds and electrocutions, the most time-consuming cases. Now they are limited strictly to heart attacks and strokes. Which one of the following would strengthen the author's conclusion that it was the redefinition of "top priority" that produced the reduction in tumaround time? (A) The number of heart attacks and strokes declined this year. (B) The mayor redefined the city's financial priorities this year. (C) Experts disagree with the mayor's definition of "top-priority emergency." (D) Other cities include gunshot wound cases in their category of top-prionity emergencies. (E) One half of all of last year's top-priority emergencies were gunshot wounds and electrocution cases.

Step by step solution

01

Understand the Argument

The argument claims that the reduction in ambulance turnaround time is misleading because of the redefinition of "top priority" emergencies. Previously, more time-consuming cases like gunshot wounds and electrocutions were included, but now only heart attacks and strokes are considered.

02

Identify What Strengthens the Argument

To strengthen the argument, evidence is needed that highlights the change in definition directly impacted the statistics. This involves showing the change in what cases count as "top priority" influences the average time by removing time-consuming cases from the equation.

03

Evaluate Each Option

Assess each choice to see if it directly supports the idea that redefining "top priority" emergencies leads to faster statistics, not actual improvements. - (A) Suggests fewer heart attacks and strokes, but does not link directly to the new definition. - (B) Talks about financial priorities, unrelated to emergency cases. - (C) Is about disagreement with the definition, not evidence of its impact. - (D) Compares definitions across cities, doesn't prove impact. - (E) Shows a significant portion of the old top-priority cases are no longer included, meaning average times could drop drastically.

04

Choose the Strongest Evidence

The best choice is (E) because it indicates half of the past cases, which were gunshot wounds and electrocutions, are excluded by the new definition of "top priority." This directly supports that the apparent reduction in times is due to fewer complex cases, not improved service.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

• Full Textbook Solutions

  Get detailed explanations and key concepts

• Unlimited Al creation

  Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

• Ads-free access

  To over 500 millions flashcards

• Money-back guarantee

  We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91Ó°ÊÓ!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Understanding LSAT Preparation

Preparing for the LSAT involves developing skills beyond memorizing facts. The LSAT tests logical reasoning, reading comprehension, and analytical thinking. Understanding the breath of what you're being tested on can help focus your study approach.

Approach preparation by:

• Understanding Question Types: Familiarize yourself with LSAT question types, such as logical reasoning, reading comprehension, and analytical reasoning. Knowing what to expect can better prepare you to tackle them effectively.
• Developing Time Management Skills: Practice under timed conditions to ensure you can complete each section within the time limit. This not only helps with speed but also reduces test-day stress.
• Practicing Test-Taking Techniques: Use past test papers and practice sets to refine your techniques. Review incorrect answers to understand mistakes and learn from them.
• Applying Critical Thinking: The LSAT is designed to assess your ability to think critically and make logical conclusions from given data.

By integrating these approaches, you can enhance your preparation and improve your overall test scores.

Mastering Argument Evaluation

Evaluating arguments is a key skill tested on the LSAT. When you assess an argument, focus on the structure and validity rather than the content alone. For instance, in the exercise about ambulance turnaround times, identifying how definitions influence conclusions is crucial.

Here's how to evaluate arguments effectively:

• Identify Premises and Conclusions: Distinguish between the supporting ideas (premises) and the main point (conclusion) the author is making.
• Check for Assumptions: Determine implicit assumptions that must hold true for the argument to be valid. In the ambulance example, the redefinition of terms hides real performance metrics.
• Consider Alternative Explanations: Look for other factors that could explain the results. This helps you understand if the argument is presented in full honesty or manipulates certain elements for a desired outcome.
• Evaluate the Evidence: Assess whether the evidence provided genuinely supports the conclusion. For the ambulance case, choice (E)'s evidence showed a shift in case types affecting outcomes.

By focusing on these aspects, you gain the ability to dissect arguments efficiently during your LSAT.

Applying Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is essential not only for the LSAT but also in academic and everyday situations. It involves analyzing situations logically, identifying biases, and questioning underlying assumptions.

Enhance your critical thinking skills by:

• Asking Questions: When presented with a statement or claim, ask yourself what exactly it means. Inquire about the evidence and assumptions behind it.
• Seeking Clarity: Avoid accepting ideas at face value. Strive for depth by diving into the specifics rather than surface-level discussions.
• Analyzing Context: Consider the broader context of a statement. For instance, redefining what counts as a top-priority emergency drastically changes understanding of ambulance operations.
• Identifying Logical Fallacies: Recognize common fallacies that people use to persuade, like hasty generalizations or appeals to emotion, which can cloud objective judgment.

Sharpening your critical thinking ability helps cut through confusion and arrive at sound conclusions.

Performing Logical Analysis

Logical analysis involves breaking down complex information to understand and evaluate its components. It's like untangling a knot to see each thread individually, as seen in the ambulance turnaround case.

To perform logical analysis, follow these steps:

• Break Down Arguments: Dissect the argument into smaller parts: premises, conclusions, and inferences. This helps clarify the logical structure.
• Use Diagrams: Sometimes drawing a simple diagram or flowchart can help visualize relationships within the argument, making it easier to track different elements.
• Compare and Contrast: Measure the argument against other similar scenarios. In the ambulance example, comparing definitions of emergencies in different cities can reveal biases or flaws in reasoning.
• Assess Logic Flow: Check for consistency in how the argument progresses from premises to conclusions. A smooth, logical flow signifies a sound argument.

Using logical analysis helps ensure arguments are well-founded and conclusions reached are justified by the information provided.