Logical Reasoning

PT159 · S1 · Q13 A cognitive psychologist has claimed that intelligence

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

A cognitive psychologist has claimed that intelligence is the ability to figure out how things work in order to overcome obstacles.

Conclusion (clearly then)

The cognitive psychologist's definition of intelligence is inadequate.

rephrase: Intelligence is not the ability to figure out how things work in order to overcome obstacles.

Evidence

In a situation where someone acquired an understanding of how things work, we'd say they were intelligent, regardless of whether they acquired that knowledge in order to overcome an obstacle.

Evaluate

The three most common moves on Method are Analogies, Faulty Implications, and Alternatives.

This somewhat has Faulty Implications vibes, because the author is essentially saying:

If your definition was correct, then someone who acquired an understanding of how something works just for the sake of learning it (not in order to overcome an obstacle), would not be considered intelligent.

However we DO consider those people intelligent.

Thus, your definition is wrong.

Goal

The author is showing that the definition is wrong because it isn't broad enough to encompass cases of intelligence that don't involve overcoming obstacles.

Find any answer that says something descriptively true.

13.

which one of the following?

  1. rejects a definition on the

    Bad Description

    The author does reject a definition, but not because it would be impractical to figure out who the definition applies to. It was because the definition wouldn't apply to certain cases that we correctly think of as showing intelligence.

    14% picked this

  2. Correct

    uses a hypothetical application of

    Why this is right

    The author does present a hypothetical situation and tries to apply the psychologist's definition. The definition would imply that this hypothetical being is NOT intelligent, whereas "we would certainly not deny that this being possesses intelligence". This is a variation of Faulty Implications. "Suppose you were right, Opponent. If so, that would mean this [crazy / wrong / absurd / counterintuitive] implication. Thus, you must be wrong."

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

    50% picked this

  3. argues that a proposed definition

    Bad Description

    The author thinks that the definition isn't broad enough; it's TOO narrow. It leaves out cases of intelligence that don't result from a desire to overcome obstacles.

    16% picked this

  4. rejects a definition on the

    Bad Description

    This says the definition would apply the term too broadly — to things "intelligence" doesn't normally apply to. But the author's argument runs the opposite way: the definition would exclude a case we'd normally include (the being that understands without an obstacle). The author is saying that with the psychologist's definition, the defined term would not apply to things to which it normally does apply.

    19% picked this

  5. argues against a proposed definition

    Bad Description

    The author is arguing against a proposed definition, but the evidence has nothing to do with talking about those who support the definition. The evidence is a hypothetical case offered by the author. There's no commentary about supporters leaning on some illicit appeal to authority.

    1% 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