Logical Reasoning

PT105 · S1 · Q2 Tennyson's line of poetry

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Tennyson's line of poetry "nature, red in tooth and claw" is misconstrued by many evolutionists as a reference to Darwin's theory of evolution.

Conclusion (misconstrued = opinion)

Tennyson's line, "nature, red in tooth and claw" is misconstrued by many evolutionists as a reference to Darwin's theory of evolution.

rephrase: When Tennyson said "nature, red in tooth and claw", he was not referring to Darwin's theory.

Evidence

That line appears in a poem published in 1850, but Darwin kept his theory secret until it was published in 1859.

Additionally, you can tell from the rest of the poem that the line is meant to refer to creationist theory that dominated biological theory at the time.

Evaluate

Whenever we do Role and Main Conclusion, we remind ourselves that 90% of the time the conclusion will be the First Sentence or a Rebuttal.

Here, the conclusion is both the first sentence and a rebuttal.

The Opinion Indicator misconstrued allows us to hear the first sentence as the Author's opinion, which she will go on to defend/support.

The "in addition" that joins the 2nd and 3rd sentences tells us that they are both premises, similar to the way in which seeing two claims joined by an "and" tells us that they're both premises (the vast majority of the time).

Goal

We're being asked about the role of the 2nd sentence, which was one of the two premises.

So let's look for "support / evidence / premise".

2.

The claim about the publication dates of Tennyson's poem and Darwin's theory plays which one of the following roles in the argument?

  1. It casts doubt on whether

    Bad Conclusion Match

    The 2nd and 3rd sentences are both premises that are meant to cast doubt on what "many evolutionists" are saying in the 1st sentence. So it's meant to cast doubt on the idea that Tennyson meant "nature, red in tooth and claw" as a reference to Darwin. This argument is never trying to argue that the theory of evolution shouldn't be attributed to Darwin alone.

    4% picked this

  2. It supports the claim that

    Bad Conclusion Match

    The 2nd and 3rd sentences are both premises that are meant to support the Conclusion claim in the 1st sentence. So we could say "it supports the claim that Tennyson did not mean 'nature, red in tooth and claw' as a reference to Darwin." This answer is saying that the author's conclusion was that "creationist theories were dominant in the early 19th century".

    5% picked this

  3. Correct

    It provides reason to believe

    Why this is right

    This answer doesn't give us the straightforward description like, "The 2nd sentence is one of the premises. The conclusion is the 1st sentence." Instead, it engages more with the meaning, with the logic of how the 2nd sentence supports the 1st sentence. In the 1st sentence, the author is claiming that Tennyson was not making a Darwin reference with the "red in tooth and claw" line. How is the 2nd sentence supposed to help persuade us of that? It's supposed to make us think that there's no way that Tennyson could have even known what Darwin's theory was at the time that Tennyson wrote that line (since Darwin's theory was a secret until it was published and wasn't published until 9 years after that Tennyson line was published).

    Skill tested: Role · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

    89% picked this

  4. It suggests that Tennyson's line

    Out of Scope: provided inspiration

    The author is bringing up the dates to support the idea that Tennyson was not making a reference to Darwin's theory in that 1850 line about "nature, red in tooth and claw". She isn't bringing up the dates to suggest that Tennyson's line in 1850 inspired Darwin's theory in 1859.

    2% picked this

  5. It implies that Tennyson knew

    Contradicted, if anything

    The 2nd sentence is there to support the 1st (to support the idea that Tennyson's famous line is not an allusion to Darwin). It's not there to imply that Tennyson knew little about dominant biological theories of the 19th century. In fact, the 3rd sentence seems to contradict that idea, because the author is telling us that the famous line is actually an allusion to the dominant biological theory of the early 19th century.

    1% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free