Logical Reasoning

PT126 · S3 · Q14 Archaeologist: An ancient stone

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

Archaeologist: An ancient stone building at our excavation site was composed of three kinds of stone—quartz, granite, and limestone.

Conclusion

The building we’re looking at was probably not a dwelling.

Evidence

The building we’re looking at was made of quartz, granite, and limestone. Most of the buildings at this settlement were dwellings, but most of the building at this site are made only of limestone.

Evaluation

This is a weirdly terrible argument. It’s almost hard to sympathize with the argument the author thinks that she’s making. When you have two Most facts about the same group, you can always infer that there is Some overlap between the traits you learn. So if we know “most buildings at site were dwellings” and “most buildings at site were only limestone”, then you can infer . But our author is making it seem like “most dwellings were made only of limestone”.

Essentially, the author thinks that if most buildings were dwellings and most were only limestone, then a building with a mix of lime/quartz/granite was probably not a dwelling. But it’s possible that most of the mixed-stone buildings were dwellings, in which case her conclusion would be wrong.

Goal

We need to help out her terrible argument by making it more likely that dwellings would not be a mix of stones.

14.

Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the archaeologist's reasoning?

  1. Most of the buildings that

    Opposite

    We could strengthen the argument if we knew that most dwellings were only limestone. By allowing for the idea most dwellings were a mix of stones, this goes in the opposite direction of what we want.

    5% picked this

  2. Correct

    Most of the buildings at

    Why this is right

    This helps to skew the data in a way that helps the author. If most buildings were dwellings, most buildings were only limestone, and most non-dwellings used stuff besides limestone, then it starts to feel more like this building we’re looking at, which uses stuff besides limestone is not a dwelling.

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

    87% picked this

  3. Most of the buildings that

    Unclear Impact

    The fact that other mixed-stone buildings use stuff besides quartz and granite doesn’t help us determine whether this mixed-stone building we’re looking at is a dwelling or not.

    3% picked this

  4. Most of the buildings at

    Opposite

    Weren’t we already told that most of the buildings were dwellings? I guess we were told “most buildings from the same time period were human dwellings”. This answer adds that most buildings from any time period at the site were a dwelling of some sort. At any rate, this weakens the argument. If most buildings at site were dwellings, then the building they’re looking at is probably a dwelling.

    2% picked this

  5. No quartz has been discovered

    Unclear Impact

    The fact that this building is the only one with quartz doesn’t help us figure out whether it’s more likely a dwelling or a non-dwelling.

    4% 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