Reading Comprehension

PT145 · S3 · P3 · Q19 Communication Systems

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension 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

Passage A One function of language is to influence others’ behavior by changing what they know, believe, or desire.

Topic

The differences and similarities between animal communication and human language, especially focusing on mental states, intention, and the possibility of purposeful communication.

Framework

Present Debate (particularly for Passage B); Highlight Noteworthy (for Passage A, which is more informative/comparative)

Main Point

**Passage A:** Animal vocalizations, unlike human language, generally lack intentional communication based on attributing mental states to others—even when they seem purposeful, they are likely automatic responses, not truly purposeful acts based on others' knowledge or needs. **Passage B:** The usual claim that animal communication differs fundamentally from human language due to a lack of conscious intention might be circular and oversimplified; recent research suggests the gap may not be as large or clear-cut as previously thought. - Most Valuable Sentence Passage A: Last line of the first paragraph: - Most Valuable Sentence Passage B: End of last paragraph:

P1: Passage A - Function of Language & Comparison to Animal Vocalizations

The author begins by reminding us that a key function of language is to get others to change what they think, know, or want. For humans, reading other people's minds (in a sense) and responding to perceived needs is a big part of conversation.

P2: Passage A - Differences Between Human and Animal Communication

The passage argues that animal vocalizations, although sometimes evolved to benefit the signaling animal, are unconscious and not guided by an understanding of other animals' mental states. Unlike people, animals (except perhaps chimps) don't seem to communicate based on what they think another animal knows or needs; experimental evidence from frogs, macaques, and chimps shows animal calls are not tailored to inform ignorant individuals.

P1: Passage B - The Conventional Distinction

The passage starts by highlighting a traditional scientific view: animal communication is rigid and reflexive, while human language is flexible and creative.

19.

Passage B differs from passage A in that passage B is more

optimistic regarding the ability of
Unsupported: bigger science lover
It would be hard to argue that passage B is more of a believer in the power of science to answer questions. Both authors support their arguments with reference to scientific findings, so they both seem optimistic that science can help us answer this fundamental question about communication. Passage A's 2nd paragraph says, "Research also suggests that ..." Passage B's final sentence says, ".... revealed by recent research".
2% picked this
Correct
disapproving of the approach taken
Why this is right
This matches up with the final paragraph of B, where the author is rolling her eyes at the stupid logic of writers such as Maritain, who "exemplifies this view that conscious intention is a category of mental experience unique to humans". The author of B complains that this common type of argument is circular. Scientists and philosophers are arbitrarily deciding that nonhuman animals don't have conscious intention, and then arguing that human communication is special because it's the only one with conscious intention. The author of B doesn't see how they can be so confident that nonhuman animals don't have conscious intention, or for that matter, that humans do. Passage A doesn't have any criticisms regarding how people writing on animal communication think about or approach this topic, so the fact that B has a criticism makes B more disapproving.
Skill tested: Author's Attitude · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.
65% picked this
open-minded in its willingness to
Out of Scope: accept conflicting positions
The author of B is not willing to accept the validity of the ideas espoused in passage A. She thinks that the view that human communication is special and different because only human communication comes with conscious intention is totally off base. This answer is actually talking about being willing to accept that "A" and "not A" are both valid positions, even though they seem to conflict. Neither author is doing that. That would be like saying, "Sure it's valid to think that only humans have conscious intention, but it's also valid to think that nonhuman animals might also have conscious intention."
7% picked this
supportive of ongoing research related
Unsupported: more supportive
Just like with (A), it's hard to say that either passage was more supportive of or more believing in science or research. Both passages refer to research. Passage A says "Research also suggests that" and "experiments reveal ..." Passage B ends by citing recent research. The fact that B is the only one that mentions recent research might make us think they care more about ongoing research, but at best we could say that B seems more aware of ongoing research, not more supportive.
6% picked this
circumspect in its refusal to
Too Strong
Too Strong: refuse to commit to any Out of Scope: still-unsettled research Q's The word "circumspect" means "cautious, measured, wary", but ultimately even if we don't know that word we can judge this answer as being inaccurate based on the fact that it accuses Passage B of "refusing to commit itself to any positions". B's final sentence seems to commit to the position that recent research reveals that there's less of a gap between animal communication and human language than has been previously been perceived. It also commits to the position that we should be questioning whether there's really a qualitative difference between animal and human communication / whether animals are only responding mechanically / whether humans are really speaking with conscious understanding. This answer is tempting because Passage A seems pretty sure that human communication is different and Passage B is more like, "Is it? Maybe we should question the assumptions underlying that." If the answer were saying that Passage B is more "circumspect about whether human communication is qualitatively different from animal communication", then we'd be fine picking it. But it's too strong to say that B "refused to commit to any position".
21% 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