Logical Reasoning

PT109 · S4 · Q11 Even though apes are the only nonhuman

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

Even though apes are the only nonhuman creatures able to learn human language, no ape has ever used its human language skills to ask such philosophical questions as, “How am I different from all other creatures?” Therefore, philosophical thought is unique to humans.

Conclusion (Therefore)

Philosophical thought is unique to humans.

Evidence

Apes are able to learn human language, but no ape has ever used its human language skills to ask philosophical questions such as, “How am I different from all other creatures?”

Evaluate

This argument assumes that the way to detect philosophical thought is by the expression of philosophical questions in human language. In other words, the author takes the fact that apes, although capable of learning human language, have not asked philosophical questions as sufficient evidence that such thought is exclusively human.

Goal

Look for an answer that fills the gap between the evidence and the conclusion by assuming that philosophical thought must be expressed in human language. If philosophical thought could be expressed in some other way, the absence of philosophical questions in apes would not necessarily mean they lack philosophical thought.

11.

The conclusion in the passage above relies on which one of the following assumptions?

  1. Human language is unique to

    Contradicted

    The passage itself states that apes can learn human language, so the uniqueness of human language isn’t assumed or necessary for the argument.

    2% picked this

  2. Apes are incapable of thinking

    Too Strong: incapable

    The argument isn’t about whether apes have the capacity to think in human language, just whether they have philosophical thoughts. Negating this answer doesn't weaken the argument, because even if apes could think in human language, they might still not ask philosophical questions.

    11% picked this

  3. Correct

    Philosophical thought can be expressed

    Why this is right

    This feels very strong, but the argument is making a certain move from "since apes haven't expressed philosophical questions in human language, they do not have philosophical thought". If we negate this, and philosophical thought could be expressed without human language, then apes might still have philosophical thought despite never asking such questions in human language. This creates doubt, which weakens the argument.

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

    82% picked this

  4. Speaking in human language is

    Irrelevant Comparison

    Whether speaking is easier than thinking has no bearing on whether the lack of philosophical questions in apes indicates an absence of philosophical thought.

    4% picked this

  5. It is more difficult to

    Irrelevant Causality / Opposite (if anything)

    The comparative ease of learning language vs. expressing philosophical questions doesn't matter. We're only here to adjudicate whether apes are / aren't capable of philosophical thought. Plus, the author seems to think that apes CAN learn human language but CAN'T express philosophical questions, so if anything it seems like learning human language is the easier thing.

    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