Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT14 S4 Q25 Explanation

In Peru, ancient disturbances in the dark

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

TopicsWeaken

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

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

In Peru, ancient disturbances in the dark surface material of a desert show up as light‐colored lines that are the width of a footpath and stretch for long distances. One group of lines branching out like rays from a single point crosses over curved lines that form a very large bird figure. a sunburst pattern? That came abruptly to an end in the middle of an uninhabited plain?"

What this question is testing

Weaken

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion less likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that look negative but attack a claim the argument never relied on.

Winning move

Find the assumption the argument depends on, then pick the choice that undermines it.

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

The question
25.

For someone who interprets the lines as referring to astronomical phenomena, which one of the following, if true, most effectively counters an objection that the crossing of the

Answer choices

  1. Very Weak Impact8% picked this

    In areas that were inhabited by ancient native North American peoples, arrangements of stones have been found that mark places where sunlight falls precisely

    This is sort of corroborating the plausibility of the hypothesis that ancient lines in the sand in South America were meant to refer to astronomical phenomena. How? It's saying, "there are other things (arrangements of stones) used in other places (North America) in ancient times that referred to astronomical phenomena." But that's incredibly loosely related, so it's barely doing any support.

  2. Correct64% picked this

    The straight lines are consistent with sight lines to points on the horizon where particular astronomical events could have been observed at certain plausible

    Why this is right

    This answer allows us to argue that all these lines served the same purpose, of referring to astronomical phenomena. The straight lines showed people where to look in order to observe certain astronomical events, and the bird looking thing was a representation of a constellation. "Even though the straight lines and the bird seem like very different and incompatible designs, they are both related to the same purpose (referring to astronomical phenomena)."

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

  3. No Impact14% picked this

    The straight-line pattern is part of a large connected complex of patterns of straight-line rays connecting certain

    This only talks about the straight-lines, so it doesn't accomplish our goal of explaining to this objector how both the straight-lines and the bird figure could both be related to astronomical phenomena.

  4. Very Weak Impact3% picked this

    Native Central American cultures, such as that of the Maya, left behind elaborate astronomical calendars that

    This is like (A). It adds a modicum of plausibility of the hypothesis that ancient lines in the sand in South America were meant to refer to astronomical phenomena. How? By saying, "there are other things (rock engravings) used in other places (Central America) in ancient times that referred to astronomical phenomena." But that's very loosely related, so it's barely doing any support.

  5. Weakens, if anything11% picked this

    There is evidence that the bird figure was made well before

    This answer doesn't help us with our goal of arguing that the bird figure and the straight-line pattern are both meant to refer to astronomical phenomena. If anything, the fact that the bird figure was made well before the straight-line pattern would help our enemy argue that these are two unrelated things that did not serve the same purpose.

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