Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT151 S2 Q10 ExplanationArchaeologist: The extensive network of

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

TopicsMain Conclusion

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

Archaeologist: The extensive network of ancient tracks on the island of Malta was most likely created through erosion caused by the passage of wheeled vehicles. Some researchers have suggested that the tracks were in fact manually cut to facilitate the passage of carts, citing the uniformity in track depth. However, this uniformity until tracks eroded to a depth that made vehicle passage impossible.

What this question is testing

Main Conclusion

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

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

The question
10.

Which one of the following is the overall conclusion of the

Answer choices, explained

  1. Correct71% picked this

    The extensive network of ancient tracks on the island of Malta was most likely created through erosion caused by

    Why this is right

    This matches the first sentence, which is what we identified as the Main Conclusion. The "most likely" indicates it's our author's opinion, and the rest of the paragraph provides support for this idea.

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

  2. Opposing Conclusion1% picked this

    Some researchers have suggested that the ancient tracks on the island of Malta were in fact manually cut to

    This is just a factual claim saying, "Some people have said X", so there's no way it would ever be our author's conclusion. And our author ends up rebutting this claim with "However", so our author is more opposed to this than concluding it.

  3. Opposing Premise1% picked this

    Some researchers cite the uniformity of the depth of the ancient tracks on the island of Malta to support the suggestion

    This is just a factual claim saying, "Some people have cited X", so there's no way it would ever be our author's conclusion.

  4. Intermediate Conclusion23% picked this

    The uniformity of depth of the ancient tracks on the island of Malta is probably indicative of the wheel diameter of the

    This is an opinion from our author, and the last sentence does provide support, so it's fair to call this a conclusion. But this lends support to the claim in the first sentence, that "the tracks on Malta are probably from erosion from the passage of wheeled vehicles".

  5. Premise Last Claim Trap5% picked this

    The ancient tracks on the island of Malta were utilized until they eroded to a depth that

    This was a premise. On Main Conclusion and Role, we only find the conclusion as the last claim about 10% of the time. 90% of the time, including here, the last claim is support. There is no support provided for this claim, so we know it can't be a conclusion.

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