Logical Reasoning

PT149 · S1 · Q21 Archaeologist: Our team discovered

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

Archaeologist: Our team discovered 5,000-year-old copper tools near a Canadian river, in a spot that offered easy access to the raw materials for birchbark canoes—birch, cedar, and spruce trees.

Conclusion

Aboriginal people in Canada built birchbark canoes 5,000 years ago.

Evidence

We found tools from 5,000 years ago that are like Aboriginal tools used in recent times to make birchbark canoes. And we found the tools near a river that offered easy access to the all the ingredients of a birchbark canoe.

Evaluate

Since the author is interpreting the significance behind these found copper tools from 5,000 years ago, we can use our Explain Curious Fact mindset.

Curious Fact - what were these 5000 year old tools all about?

Author's Explanation - they were used by Aboriginal people to make birchbark canoes

We always evaluate these arguments by asking two questions: - how else could we explain the curious fact? - how plausible is the author's hypothesis?

What could be an alternate explanation for these 5,000 year old copper tools? Maybe they were used for something other than canoe-making. Maybe they were used by somebody other than the Aboriginal people.

How plausible is the author's story? Pretty good. The Aboriginal people nowadays use tools like these to make birchbark canoes, and the tools were found in an area that had access to all the raw materials for birchbark canoe-making.

Goal

We're assuming that the Aboriginal people have been making canoes with tools like these for 5,000 years or more (they didn't just recently develop this habit of using these tools to make birchbark canoes).

We're assuming that the tools we found were used by people who were from this area, where the raw materials were found.

Tough to predict an answer; we can just remind ourselves that the correct answer, if negated, will be an objection to the idea that these tools show us that Aboriginals were making birchbark canoes 5,000 years ago.

21.

The archaeologist's argument depends on the assumption that the copper tools that were found

had no trade value 5,000
Too Strong: no value
Why does the author have to assume these rad copper tools had zero trade value. If they had some trade value, would that be an objection? No.
1% picked this
Correct
were present in the region
Why this is right
If we negated this and said, "Hey author, these tools weren't even in this region 5,000 years ago", then that would badly weaken his case that these tools show that the Aboriginal people were making birchbark canoes 5,000 years ago. In most LSAT arguments involving some found piece of archeological evidence, some artifact, the author tries to learn something about the local inhabitants from this found object. Those authors are always assuming that the found object is actually a local object, not some object that was brought from a different region and just dropped there.
Skill tested: Necessary Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
56% picked this
were designed to be used
Too Strong: only
The author only needs to assume that these tools were relevant / useful to making birchbark canoes. She doesn't need to assume that the tools only had that use. Just because birch, cedar, and spruce were the only trees mentioned in relation to raw materials for building birchbark canoes, that doesn't mean the tools were only good for those trees. This is a common trap answer: Only Ones Mentioned → The Only Ones
4% picked this
were the only kind of
Too Strong: only
The author needs to assume that these copper tools could have been used to make canoes 5,000 years ago, and she's concluding that they were used. But these doesn't need to believe that no other tools were ever used in the canoe building process. If I found evidence that a certain civilization had spatulas, maple syrup, and flour, I can speculatively conclude that "This civilization knew how to make pancakes!" without committing myself to believing that all you need to make pancakes is a spatula, maple syrup, and flour.
12% picked this
are not known to have
Out of Scope
Out of Scope: other than canoe making This is yet another Only Thing Mentioned → The Only Thing trap answer. Most of the trap answers on this problem are using this same trap, and making answers that are too extreme. The author thinks that these tools were used at some point to gather some raw materials from some local trees and turn them into a birchbark canoe. (C) they only gathered raw materials from those 3 trees mentioned. (D) they were the only tools used to make the canoe. (E) they were used to make only canoes.
28% 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