Logical Reasoning

PT124 · S1 · Q20 Biologist: Lions and tigers

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

Biologist: Lions and tigers are so similar to each other anatomically that their skeletons are virtually indistinguishable.

Evidence

Lions and tigers are so similar to each other anatomically that their skeletons are virtually indistinguishable.

But their behaviors are known to be quite different: tigers hunt only as solitary individuals, whereas lions hunt in packs.

Conclusion

Paleontologists cannot reasonably infer solely on the basis of skeletal anatomy that extinct predatory animals, such as certain dinosaurs, hunted in packs.

Evaluate

The argument extrapolates from the case of lions and tigers to extinct predatory animals, such as dinosaurs.

While skeletal anatomy alone cannot explain the hunting behavior of lions and tigers, it could still explain the hunting behavior of some extinct predatory animals. The argument assumes what is true for lions and tigers is true for extinct predatory animals, such as certain dinosaurs.

20.

The conclusion is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

  1. The skeletons of lions and

    Too Weak

    This comparison draws a common thread between lions, tigers, and some extinct predators, but leaves open the possibility that some skeletal features are unique enough to determine whether those extinct predatory animals hunted in packs.

    7% picked this

  2. There have existed at least

    Too Weak

    The similarity between the skeletal anatomy between the two extinct predatory animals may also have a characteristic that would enable paleontologists to determine whether they hunted in packs.

    16% picked this

  3. Correct

    If skeletal anatomy alone is

    Why this is right

    This ensures that what is true of lions and tigers is also true for extinct predatory animals, such as dinosaurs.

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

    67% picked this

  4. If any two animal species

    Reversed Comparison

    The issue isn’t whether paleontologists could infer that two species have the same skeletal anatomy, but rather whether they could infer the hunting behavior of those extinct predatory animals based solely on their skeletal anatomy.

    4% picked this

  5. If it is unreasonable to

    Weakens

    This would suggest that if the skeletal remains were not indistinguishable, then it would be reasonable to infer differences in hunting behavior of two distinct species of extinct animals based on differences in skeletal remains.

    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