WeakenDiff: Easy

Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Most young children have flat feet, which can cause health issues when they get older. To prevent this, the standard practice is to have them wear special shoes that support the foot to help the arch grow.

Conclusion: The traditional method of using supportive shoes is an effective way to encourage the development of a natural arch in flat-footed children.

Reasoning: Flat-footedness can lead to physical pain later in life, and supportive shoes are designed to provide the extra structural help necessary for the arch to form.

Analysis: To weaken this argument, we need to find a reason why these supportive shoes might not actually help—or might even hinder—arch development. The argument assumes that external support is the best way to 'foster' growth, but it's possible that the foot needs to move naturally to build the necessary muscle and bone structure. Look for an answer that suggests children who don't wear these shoes actually end up with better arches than those who do. If the 'cure' actually prevents the body from doing its own work, the efficacy of the treatment is severely undermined.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

4.

Which one of the following, if true, most calls into question the efficacy of the traditional treatment described above?

Correct Answer
D
D directly undermines the causal claim. If flat-footed children who do not wear the special shoes are just as likely to develop arches as those who do, then the shoes are not making the difference the traditional treatment claims.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep