#11 - Must Be True

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation
(See the complete passage discussion here: lsat/viewtopic.php?t=14445)

The correct answer choice is (E)

This question asks us to identify the role of medical experts in relation to custom-made medical
illustrations. Having a solid grasp of the argument—counterargument structure underlying the
passage is once again key. The author describes the role of medical experts in the second paragraph,
claiming that deceptive illustrations would be inadmissible as evidence unless an expert testified to
their accuracy (lines 26-29).

Answer choice (A): Although medical experts do play a role in establishing the admissibility of
medical illustrations, they are not the ones making the decision as to which custom-made medical
illustrations should be admissible. Read carefully—medical experts only “testify to their accuracy”
(line 29); they do not decide questions of law.

Answer choice (B): This answer choice is incorrect, because medical experts are not the ones who
temper the impact of medical illustrations. Professional medical illustrators do (lines 33-36).

Answer choice (C): This is a reverse answer. The role of medical experts is not to make medical
illustrations understandable; rather, the role of medical illustrations is to make medical experts
understandable (lines 55-64).

Answer choice (D): The passage offers no evidence to support the claim that medical experts provide
opinions to attorneys as to which illustrations would be useful.

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice, as the author’s statements in lines 26-29
directly support it.

[hhaugen@ualberta.ca]

Hello,

So I fell for the reverse answer of C, and I did so because of the description of expert medical testimony in the final paragraph.

It states "Expert testimony by medical professionals often relies heavily on the use of technical terminology, which those who are not specially trained in the field find difficult to translate mentally into visual imagery. Since, for most people, adequate understanding of physical data depends on thinking at least partly in visual terms, the clearly presented visual stimulation provided by custom-made illustrations can be quite instructive."

I thought the implication here in their argument was that the illustrations, without medical testimony would be hard to interpret and understand for jurors and that medical testimony explanation is needed, thus making that the medical experts role. Why is this reasoning wrong?

I understand that P2 quote about confirming the illustrations, but thought this concluding argument about the medical experts needed verbal testimony was more important. Is it because the author overall is arguing for the medical illustrations, not arguing for the importance of medical experts, so their primary role is to confirm the validity of the illustrations?

Thank you!
Hannah

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi Hannah,

This paragraph can be a bit tricky to break down. But at all points in the final paragraph, the visual is being used to explain the verbal. The author calls the visual images "instructive" while the verbal description is "very complex." The idea behind the paragraph is not that the experts are explaining the visuals---the verbal explanation is the difficult part! It's that the visual aids are helping the verbal experts be understood by the lay people in the hearing. It seems that you have it a bit flipped around, which is only natural given that they are using the terms verbal and visual fairly close together. It can be easy to turn the concepts backward in your head. Look for what they are saying is the key to understanding. That's the explanatory/helpful part. It's the visual imagry.

Hope that helps!