Logical Reasoning

PT110 · S2 · Q12 The five senses have traditionally

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

The five senses have traditionally been viewed as distinct yet complementary.

Conclusion (this shows that)

Synesthesiacs have senses that don't respect the usual boundaries between the five recognized senses.

Evidence

The traditional / usual / typical understanding of the five senses was that they had distinct boundaries, each sense having its own range of stimuli that wouldn't be able to stimulate other senses.

Synesthesiacs report tasting a banana and tasting "blue", or seeing a color and saying they can smell it.

Evaluate

Since the author's conclusion is interpreting the findings of an experiment / study, it's a high contender for the Explain Curious Fact mindset.

Curious Fact ... why are synesthesiacs saying they taste blue or can smell a certain color?

Author's Explanation ... most people have well-defined boundaries between their five senses, but in the case of synesthesiacs, a stimulus for one sense is capable of stimulating another sense. (the taste stimulus of a banana is capable of stimulating the visual sense of color / the visual stimuli of color is capable of stimulating the olfactory sense of smell)

Goal

We want to weaken these arguments one of two ways:

1. suggest an Alternate Explanation for the curious fact (what could be a different way to explain the research on synesthesiacs? maybe they're just making stuff up? they're messing around with researchers? maybe they have a hard time describing things and so they choose the wrong words?)

2. hurt the plausibility of the Author's Explanation (what could make us doubt that synesthesiacs have atypical brains with senses that can actually impact each other? do brain scans of synesthesiacs look identical to those of average people? are there other experiments we've done with synesthesiacs that make it seem like their five senses DO respect the usual boundaries?)

12.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

  1. Correct

    Synesthesiacs demonstrate a general, systematic

    Why this is right

    This provides an Alternate Explanation for the curious fact (that's the most common pattern on Weaken questions). Instead of explaining the research results ("this banana tastes like blue" / "this color smells like rain") as the author does, by positing that synesthesiacs have different brains in which sensory organs cross-communicate, this answer offers a different explanation: "Given that synesthesiacs are famously bad at using and understanding words (they have a general and systematic impairment), maybe they're saying that the banana tastes blue simply because they have an impairment when it comes to using and understanding words)."

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

    63% picked this

  2. Recent evidence strongly suggests that

    No Impact

    The existence of a 6th or 7th sense doesn't weaken this argument at all. We're just trying to figure out why synesthesiacs seem to blend the 5 senses we already know of. For everyone else, it's usually thought that there are distinct boundaries between these 5 senses. For synesthesiacs, it seems like there aren't. How come? We wouldn't be able to say, "the synesthesiacs are different because all humans have 7 senses." We would need a fact that's distinctive to synesthesiacs, if we're trying to distinguish them from the rest of us.

    13% picked this

  3. The particular ways in which

    Strengthens, if anything

    The fact that the sensory experiences overlap in a definite pattern makes it more likely that there is a physical, physiological explanation for synesthesia. If synesthesiacs were randomly making stuff up, there probably wouldn't be a definite pattern to the specific ways in which the experiences overlap.

    18% picked this

  4. The synesthetic phenomenon has been

    No Impact

    This helps us understand that synesthesia has existed among humans for a while, but it does nothing to clarify what synesthesia is. Are all these synesthesiacs throughout history blending senses because their senses don't respect the usual boundaries, or for some other reason? This answer doesn't help us assess that central question at all.

    1% picked this

  5. Synesthesiacs can be temporarily rid

    Strengthens, if anything

    The fact that synesthesia can be affected by drugs suggests that there is a neurochemical / physiological basis to it, which adds some plausibility to the author's explanation. If synesthesia were really just a psychological or behavioral phenomenon, then changing people's biochemistry wouldn't be as likely to affect it. By "drugs" here, it means medicine, not recreational mind-altering drugs (which are probably going to make everyone a synesthesiac for a couple hours).

    5% 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