Logical Reasoning

PT145 · S4 · Q23 For a computer to be intelligent

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

For a computer to be intelligent, it must possess at least one of three qualities: creativity, self-awareness, or the ability to learn from its mistakes.

Conclusion

If the AR3000 is intelligent, then it must have the ability to learn from its mistakes.

Evidence

For a computer to be intelligent, it must at least one of three qualities: creativity, self-awareness, or ability to learn from mistakes.

The AR3000 is not creative or self-aware.

Evaluate

The argument has two premises, one conditional and one factual. The conditional one says that in order to be a certain thing it's required to have at least one of a set of options. The fact rules out all but one option. The conclusion is a conditional that says .

Goal

Premise 1: X → at least one of A,B,C Premise 2: Thing is not A or B. Conclusion: If Thing is X, then Thing is C.

23.

Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its reasoning to the argument above?

  1. Every vaccine is either an

    Bad Conclusion Match

    This does provide a conditional with an "at least one of these options" outcome. Vaccine → attenuated-virus, dead-virus vaccine, or pure DNA We now need a premise that rules out two of these categories for Thing X, and then a conditional conclusion that says "If thing X is a vaccine, then it must be that last option". But this conclusion is not a conditional. We already know it's a vaccine. In the original, we heard that "at least one of these options" must be true for Intelligence, but we didn't ever know that AR3000 was intelligent.

    7% picked this

  2. Correct

    Every commonly used vaccine is

    Why this is right

    This has a conditional premise with a set of "at least one must be true" options. Common → attenuated-virus , dead-virus vaccine , or pure DNA Used vaccine We now need a premise that rules out two of these categories for vaccine X, and then a conditional conclusion that says "If vaccine X is a commonly used vaccine, then it must be that last option". The second premise says Vaccine X is not dead-virus and not attenuated-virus. The conclusion is indeed conditional and says, Vaccine X is commonly used vaccine → pure DNA.

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

    80% picked this

  3. Every vaccine is either a

    Missing 2nd Premise

    This only has one premise, so it's not going to be able to match the original. We needed one premise that says "to be ___ , you got to be at least one of these three things" and then a second premise that said, "but thing X isn't two of those".

    8% picked this

  4. Every commonly used vaccine is

    Bad Premise / Conclusion Match

    Original argument This answer P1. X → A or B or C X → A or B or C P2. Thing Y isn't Thing Y does something A or B that shows not A. C. If thing Y is X, If thing Y is not B, then must be C then must be C

    1% picked this

  5. Every commonly used vaccine is

    Bad Premise / Conclusion Match

    Original argument This answer P1. X → A or B or C X → A or B or C P2. Thing Y isn't Thing Y is not B A or B C. If thing Y is X, If thing Y is not A, then must be C then must be C

    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