Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT7 S4 Q22 Explanation

Historian: There is no direct evidence

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

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

Historian: There is no direct evidence that timber was traded between the ancient nations of Poran and Nayal, but the fact that a law setting tariffs on timber imports from Poran was enacted during the third that period a timber trade was conducted.

Critic: Your reasoning is flawed. During its third dynasty, Nayal may well have imported timber from Poran, but certainly on today’s statute books there remain many laws regulating activities in which people no longer engage.

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
22.

The critic’s response to the historian is flawed

Answer choices

  1. Trap4% picked this

    produces evidence that is consistent with there not having been any timber trade between Poran and Nayal during

  2. Trap15% picked this

    cites current laws without indicating whether the laws cited are relevant to

  3. Trap6% picked this

    fails to recognize that the historian’s conclusion was based on indirect evidence rather

  4. Correct69% picked this

    takes no account of the difference between a law’s enactment at a particular time and a law’s existence as part of a

    Why this is right

    Answer D is correct.

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

  5. Trap6% picked this

    accepts without question the assumption about the purpose of laws that underlies

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