Logical Reasoning

PT122 · S2 · Q17 Human beings can exhibit complex

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

Human beings can exhibit complex, goal-oriented behavior without conscious awareness of what they are doing.

Conclusion (Thus)

Establishing that nonhuman animals are intelligent will not establish that they have consciousness.

Evidence

Humans can exhibit complex, goal-oriented behavior without conscious awareness of what they're doing.

Evaluate

Very confusing conclusion, so we need to think about what it's saying and what our burden of proof is, if we were trying to convince a courtroom that the conclusion is true.

"Merely establishing X will not establish Y". What's another way to say that?

"X does not prove that Y is true" "X is not sufficient to prove Y"

This conclusion is refuting a conditional. It's saying that X --/--> Y.

To refute a conditional you prove that it's possible for the trigger to be true while the outcome isn't. To prove that "knowing X does not mean you know Y", we would need an example where X is true but Y isn't.

To prove that "knowing intelligent doesn't mean you know consciousness", we would need an example where Intelligence is happening but consciousness is not.

When we look at the evidence, has the author presented a data point showing that sometimes Intelligence is present but Consciousness is not?

He presented a data point where, Complex, Goal-Oriented behavior is present but Conscious Awareness is not.

Goal

The author is treating "complex, goal-oriented behavior" as a proxy for "intelligence", so he must be assuming that this complex, goal-oriented behavior is intelligent behavior.

If we felt very lost on this problem, we could guess that the correct answer will talk about "intelligent", because that's a New Term in the Conclusion.

And because "consciousness / conscious awareness" is mentioned twice, we don't need to be looking for that idea in the answer. We need to link "intelligent" to whatever idea is linked to "conscious awareness".

17.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

  1. Correct

    Complex, goal-oriented behavior requires intelligence.

    Why this is right

    As we anticipated, the author presents the first sentence as an example in which intelligence is present, but consciousness is not. However, the first sentence doesn't mention intelligence. It instead just says "complex, goal-oriented behavior", so the author is assuming that such behavior involves intelligence. If we negated this answer, we'd have the notion that, "You can have complex, goal-oriented behavior without having intelligence". That would weaken the argument because the author's premise needs to establish there is intelligence but isn't consciousness. If the he uses a substitute concept for intelligence (complex, goal-oriented behavior), but that concept isn't a reliable indicator of intelligence, then the author's lone premise has dubious relevance to the conclusion.

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

    65% picked this

  2. The possession of consciousness does

    Not Assumed

    If we negated this and got, "having consciousness does guarantee that you have intelligence", would that weaken the argument? No. The author is saying "having intelligence doesn't guarantee that you have consciousness". He doesn't care if the converse of that is a guarantee. If I'm arguing that "establishing you have a rectangle does not establish that you have a square", you're not objecting to me by saying, "Nuh uh — establishing that you have a square guarantees that you have a rectangle". I agree with you. The logic does work in the direction you just stated, but not in the direction I stated.

    22% picked this

  3. All forms of conscious behavior

    Too Strong: all

    Did the author ever make a reasoning move from, this thing → this thing has consciousness has intelligence ? No the only reasoning move the author made was from "this thing has complex, goal-oriented behavior" to "this thing has intelligence". If we negated this and said that "some forms of conscious behavior do not involve intelligence", that wouldn't hurt the author at all.

    3% picked this

  4. The possession of intelligence entails

    Contradicts the Conclusion

    The conclusion is arguing the opposite of this. The conclusion is that "the possession of intelligence does not entail the possession of consciousness."

    5% picked this

  5. Some intelligent human behavior is

    Out of Scope: not complex

    The author is saying that humans can exhibit complex, goal-oriented behavior, so doesn't that mean that the author is also saying that sometimes we aren't exhibiting that behavior? Technically, no. We're never allowed to just assume a counterfactual. If I say "Some NFL players are men", you're not allowed to assume that I'm also saying "Some NFL players are not men". Beyond that, this specifically talking about intelligent human behavior. This author may agree that some human behavior is not complex and not goal-oriented, but disagree that any intelligent behavior lacks those traits. If we negate this, it's saying, "All intelligent human behavior is complex and goal-oriented". Would that hurt the argument? No, that would actually strengthen the argument, since the author currently has a missing link between the concepts of "intelligence" and "complex / goal-oriented behavior".

    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