Logical Reasoning

PT115 · S2 · Q19 Jeff: Proposed regulations concerning the

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

Jeff: Proposed regulations concerning the use of animals in scientific experimentation would prohibit experimentation on those species that humans empathize with: dogs and horses, for example.

Conclusion (Hence)

This proposal (to prohibit experimentation on those species that humans empathize with" should be extended to all experimentation on all mammals.

Evidence

Extensive neurological research on mammals shows that they are all capable of feeling pain.

Evaluate / Goal

We're trying to extend a prohibition to all mammals, so we need a rule whose trigger applies to these other mammals, and whose outcome sounds like or supports the language of "you can't do scientific experimentation on them".

So let's look for something like,

If they're capable → then can't of feeling pain experiment on them

19.

Which one of the following is a principle that, if established, would best support Jeff's conclusion?

  1. Regulations on the use of

    Bad Evidence Match

    This answer helps us argue that regulations on animal experimentation should be worried about respecting the feelings of humans. This rule would help those mammals whom we empathize with and feel guilty experimenting on. But it wouldn't help the other mammals that Jeff wants to extend the prohibition to cover. We would want an answer saying that regulations on animal experimentation should be worried about respecting the capacity to feel pain of the research subjects.

    1% picked this

  2. Whatever means are used to

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This is a rule that governs how one should determine whether an animal feels pain. We've already determined that all mammals are capable of feeling pain. We need a rule that governs whether or not experimentation on an animal should be allowed.

    4% picked this

  3. Only those experiments on animals

    Bad Conclusion Match

    Since "only" always indicates a right side idea, this is saying if an experiment → then it's known should be prohibited to cause pain By contraposing this, we could get a rule that says, "If it isn't known to cause pain, then it shouldn't be prohibited". A rule that allows us to conclude that experimentation shouldn't be prohibited is useless to us. Jeff is trying to conclude that experimentation should be prohibited.

    6% picked this

  4. Scientists who perform experiments on

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This is a rule that governs whether one should empathize with a given animal. We need a rule that governs whether or not experimentation should be allowed on a given mammal.

    18% picked this

  5. Correct

    Scientific experimentation should be prohibited

    Why this is right

    Since "any" always indicates a left side idea, this is saying a creature is capable → experimentation of feeling pain should be prohibited That works great for Jeff's argument. He established that all mammals are capable of feeling pain, and so according to this rule we would get his conclusion that "experimentation should be prohibited on all mammals".

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

    70% 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