Logical Reasoning

PT116 · S2 · Q23 Toxicologist: Recent research has shown

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

Toxicologist: Recent research has shown that dioxin causes cancer in rats.

Conclusion (should = opinion)

The use of dioxin should be completely banned.

Evidence

Recent research has shown that dioxin causes cancer in rats.

Evaluate

This is one of those rare cases on Main Conclusion / Role where the conclusion is actually the final claim.

They tried to hide it by starting the final sentence with some concessions, but the Opinion Indicator "should" helps us find it.

We're being asked about the first sentence, which was the supporting premise. Since dioxin causes cancer in rats, the author thinks dioxin should be banned.

Goal

Let's look for "premise / support / evidence" for the conclusion that the use of dioxin should be banned.

23.

That dioxin causes cancer in rats figures in the argument in which one of the following ways?

  1. It is presented as the

    Unclear Match

    We don't specifically what hazard the researcher is trying to prevent by banning dioxin. The hazard in the first sentence is "rats getting cancer". It seems more common sensical to think that the author wants to ban dioxin to prevent the hazard it might cause to humans.

    7% picked this

  2. It is presented as a

    Out of Scope: benefit

    Hahaha. This answer is saying that the author's conclusion is recommending that we ban dioxin, but "if we don't ban dioxin (if we don't act on that recommendation), then the one benefit of still using dioxin is that rats would get cancer." That's dark, (B). We definitely can't infer that the author was saying that cancerous rats was a benefit.

    0% picked this

  3. It is presented as evidence

    Bad Conclusion Match

    The first sentence is presented as evidence for the claim that "the use of dioxin should be completely banned".

    3% picked this

  4. Correct

    It is presented as a

    Why this is right

    The finding from recent research that dioxin causes cancer in rats motivates the course of action of "completely banning the use of dioxin". In other words, "It is presented as a premise that supports the course of action recommended in the conclusion".

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

    87% picked this

  5. It is presented as evidence

    Bad Conclusion Match

    The first sentence is presented as evidence for the claim that "the use of dioxin should be completely banned".

    2% 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