akela wrote:
Pharmacist: A large study of people aged 65- 81 and suffering from insomnia showed that most of insomnia' s symptoms are substantially alleviated by ingesting melatonin, a hormone produced by the pineal gland, which plays a role in the regulation of the body's biological clock. Thus, the recent claims made by manufacturers of melatonin supplements that the pineal gland produces less melatonin as it ages are evidently correct.
The pharmacist's argument is flawed in that it
(A) infers from the effect of an action that the action is intended to produce that effect
(B) relies on the opinions of individuals who are likely to be biased
( C) depends on using two different meanings for the same term to draw its conclusion
(D) confuses an effect of a phenomenon with its cause
(E) relies on a sample that is unrepresentative
LSAT
Argument Summary:The pharmacist concludes that because melatonin alleviates insomnia symptoms in elderly people, the claim that the pineal gland produces less melatonin as it ages must be correct.
Option Analyses:A) infers from the effect of an action that the action is intended to produce that effect-
This choice is about intentionality, which isn't what the pharmacist's argument is concerned with. The pharmacist isn't saying that the body intends to produce less melatonin; they're drawing a conclusion about biological function, not intention.
B) relies on the opinions of individuals who are likely to be biased- The argument is based on a study's findings, not on individual opinions, biased or otherwise. There's no mention or implication in the argument that it's grounded in personal opinions, making this option irrelevant to identifying the flaw in the pharmacist's reasoning.
C) depends on using two different meanings for the same term to draw its conclusion- This would imply the argument is flawed due to equivocation, using a word or term in two different senses. However, the pharmacist's argument does not appear to misuse or shift meanings of terms in making its conclusion.
The terms used are consistent throughout, so this option does not apply.D) confuses an effect of a phenomenon with its cause- At first glance, this seems plausible because the pharmacist might be seen as confusing the effect (improvement of symptoms with melatonin supplementation) with a cause (reduced melatonin production due to aging). However,
the primary issue isn't exactly this confusion but rather the generalization from a specific effect to a broad conclusion without direct evidence of causation or representativeness.E) relies on a sample that is unrepresentative- This is the correct answer because it identifies a key flaw: generalizing from a specific study group (elderly people with insomnia) to all elderly people regarding melatonin production. The study's findings about supplementation's effectiveness in alleviating symptoms for this group do not necessarily support broader claims about age-related declines in melatonin production for all elderly individuals. This option correctly points out that the argument assumes the study's sample is representative of the broader aging population, which is a significant leap without evidence specifically addressing melatonin production rates across different ages.
Why E is Correct:The crux of the issue lies in the generalization from specific findings (melatonin's effectiveness in a particular age group with a specific condition) to a broad conclusion about biological processes (aging leads to decreased melatonin production). E) directly addresses this flaw, highlighting that the argument assumes the study's findings about a subgroup (those with insomnia) can be extrapolated to make a general statement about aging and melatonin production, without evidence showing that the sample is truly representative of the broader population's biological aging process.