Logical Reasoning

PT106 · S2 · Q22 Wirth: All efforts to identify a gene

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

Wirth: All efforts to identify a gene responsible for predisposing people to manic-depression have failed.

Anticipate

Chang is saying,

Chang is kinda saying, .

22.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses Chang's criticism of Wirth's argument?

  1. Correct

    It presupposes only one possibility

    Why this is right

    We can make this work. Wirth is assuming that genetic predispositions only come from a single gene, and Chang is saying "it's also possible that genetic predispositions come from a cluster of genes interacting".

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

    68% picked this

  2. It depends on separate pieces

    No Contradiction

    Chang (and pretty much every LSAT author ever) does not accuse the other person of saying contradictory things.

    11% picked this

  3. It relies on the opinion

    Unsupported: outside their expertise

    We are inclined to think that the experts we're hearing about are experts in the field of searching for genetic underpinnings to diseases. We have no reason to think otherwise, and Chang doesn't say anything to that effect. He implicitly is trusting the researchers they're talking about.

    1% picked this

  4. It disallows in principle any

    Too Strong: disallows all counterevidence

    This is one way to describe circular reasoning: being so convinced by the truth of your conclusion that you fail to consider counterevidence. Chang does not imply that Wirth is being this stubborn or narrow-minded.

    12% picked this

  5. It treats something that is

    Out of Scope: unlikely vs. impossible

    Nothing Chang says is a commentary on Wirth going too far with strength of language. Chang isn't saying, as this answer implies, that "Yes it's unlikely that there isn't a genetic predisposition, but it isn't certain!" Chang is saying, "It actually looks like there is a genetic predisposition, only it comes from a set of genes, not a single gene."

    9% 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