Logical Reasoning

PT135 · S1 · Q9 Some paleontologists have suggested

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

Some paleontologists have suggested that Apatosaurus, a huge dinosaur, was able to gallop.

Main Conclusion

Apatosaurus was probably not able to gallop.

Intermediate Conclusion

Galloping would probably have broken Apatosaurus’s legs.

Evidence

Experiments with modern bones show how much strain they can withstand before breaking.

By taking into account the diameter and density of Apatosaurus leg bones, it is possible to calculate that those bones could not have withstood the strains of galloping.

Evaluate

Whenever we do Main Conclusion / Role, we remind ourselves that 85% of the time it's an upside down argument (the conclusion appears earlier than the support).

Specifically about 65% of them are pivot/rebuttal conclusions and about 25% are first-sentence conclusions.

Since this paragraph begins with an Attribution (some P's have suggested that), we'd anticipate a pivot-pushback from the author.

We get that at the start of the 2nd sentence with "This however is unlikely". As soon as we can tell the author is supporting that idea, we know that this was our conclusion.

The next clause begins with the Support Indicator "because galloping ...".

Goal

We want the best meaning match for "This is unlikely". Since it is a rebuttal, we need to articulate the rebuttal conclusion.

THIS = Apatosaurus was able to gallop.

So we want, "Apatosaurus was likely not able to gallop".

9.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion drawn by the argument as a whole?

  1. Galloping would probably have broken

    Intermediate Conclusion

    This supports the argument’s main point, which is about whether Apatosaurus can gallop.

    9% picked this

  2. It is possible to calculate

    Premise

    This is a premise of the argument. We're looking for "Apatosaurus probably couldn't gallop".

    3% picked this

  3. Correct

    The claim of paleontologists that

    Why this is right

    This best paraphrases the main conclusion, "This is unlikely".

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

    82% picked this

  4. If galloping would have broken

    Assumption

    This conditional was never said in the argument (so it can't be pointing to our explicit conclusion). This is an assumption connecting the intermediate conclusion to the main conclusion, but we just want to hear "Apatosaurus was probably unable to gallop".

    5% picked this

  5. Modern bones are quite similar

    Assumption Bait

    This claim was definitely never made. It resembles an assumption that goes into making the intermediate conclusion that galloping would have broken Apatosaurus's legs, but it doesn't look anything like the claim we're seeking: Apatosaurus probably was unable to gallop.

    0% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

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