Logical Reasoning

PT123 · S3 · Q25 Some anthropologists argue that the human

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

Some anthropologists argue that the human species could not have survived prehistoric times if the species had not evolved the ability to cope with diverse natural environments.

Opposing Point

The human species ~DE → ~S could not have survived prehistoric times if the species had not evolved the ability to cope with diverse natural environments.

Evidence

There is considerable DE + ~S evidence that Australopithecus afarensis, a prehistoric species related to early humans.

Conclusion

Hence, the anthropologists’ claim is false.

Evaluate

This argument attempts DE + S to refute a conditional relationship, but the evidence used to do so meets the necessary condition and not the sufficient condition. This evidence would however refute the negation of the anthropologists’ claim.

25.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

  1. Correct

    confuses a condition’s being required

    Why this is right

    This identifies the error of reasoning as mistaking a sufficient condition for one that is necessary.

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

    50% picked this

  2. takes for granted that if

    Out of Scope

    This relationship has no impact on the argument.

    6% picked this

  3. generalizes, from the fact that

    Wrong Flaw

    This describes the flaw of generalization. The argument does not generalize from a specific case, but rather uses a specific counterexample

    13% picked this

  4. fails to consider the possibility

    Not a Flaw

    Even if this were true, it would not undermine the argument and so does not point to an error of reasoning in the argument.

    18% picked this

  5. fails to consider the possibility

    Wrong Flaw

    This describes the flaw of failing to rule out possible alternative causes.

    12% 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