Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT154 S1 Q5 ExplanationTaste buds were the primary tool

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

TopicsFlaw

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

Start practicing free

Free to start

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

Taste buds were the primary tool early humans used for testing foods. Sour taste warns of possible spoilage of food while bitterness is a warning of many poisons. Early humans also recognized sweet foods and salty foods as meeting nutritional needs. So the fact that people can now clearly distinguish these four use of taste to test for the healthfulness of foods.

What this question is testing

Flaw

Your task

Describe the reasoning error the argument actually commits.

Common trap

Answers that name a real logical flaw the argument doesn't actually make.

Winning move

Articulate the gap in the reasoning yourself, then match it to the choice that describes that 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
5.

The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds

Answer choices, explained

  1. Necessary vs. Sufficient5% picked this

    takes a necessary condition for the truth of its conclusion to be sufficient to

    This answer describes a conditional logic flaw: Evidence: A → B B Conclusion: A This argument doesn't use a conditional statement as evidence and then draw a conclusion based on an illegal reversal.

  2. Irrelevant Comparison2% picked this

    fails to consider that many people associate foods more with their smells than

    "Fails to consider" means that this answer choice should weaken the argument. The fact that some people associate foods with their smells more than their tastes doesn't prove or disprove the argument's claim about why we can distinguish between a certain four tastes.

  3. Irrelevant Comparison2% picked this

    fails to consider that some nutritious foods are bitter when raw but not

    Without more information, this doesn't really impact the argument. Are these foods poisonous when raw but not after being cooked? Even if they aren't, do humans normally to eat these foods without cooking them first?

  4. Irrelevant Comparison4% picked this

    fails to consider that most early humans ate a much more limited range of foodstuffs

    Does this mean that early humans had a greater need to test food before eating it, or did they have less need? Without more information, it's not clear how this comparison between early humans and contemporary people impacts the argument.

  5. Correct87% picked this

    takes what might be only a partial explanation of a phenomenon to be

    Why this is right

    The need to test food could certainly help explain why people can now clearly distinguish these four tastes. It might easily be a partial explanation. But the evidence doesn't support a claim that the need to test food completely explains our ability to distinguish these tastes.

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

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