Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT133 S2 Q6 Explanation

Recently discovered bird fossils are about

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsFlaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • 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

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Recently discovered bird fossils are about 20 million years older than the fossils of the birdlike dinosaurs from which the birds are generally claimed to have descended. So these newly discovered fossils show, contrary to that no bird descended from any dinosaur.

What this question is testing

Flaw

Your task

Describe the reasoning error the argument actually commits.

Common trap

Answers that name a real logical flaw the argument doesn't actually make.

Winning move

Articulate the gap in the reasoning yourself, then match it to the choice that describes that gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
6.

The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that

Answer choices

  1. Correct78% picked this

    draws a generalization that is broader than is warranted by the

    Why this is right

    This points out the degree issue with the argument’s conclusion.

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

  2. Contradiction3% picked this

    rejects the consensus view of experts in the field without providing

    The argument does provide counterevidence.

  3. Wrong Flaw0% picked this

    attacks the adherents of the opposing view personally instead of addressing any reason

    The argument does not engage in personal attacks.

  4. Unsupported4% picked this

    fails to consider the possibility that dinosaurs descended

    The argument’s conclusion does not preclude this as a possibility.

  5. Unsupported14% picked this

    ignores the possibility that dinosaurs and birds descended from a

    The argument’s conclusion does not preclude this as a possibility.

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