PrepTest 156

[lcid:3723] Prep Test 156 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S4 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Anthropologist: During the last Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: E

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Strategy Overview

Identify the conclusion Identify the premise Determine the role played by the statement from the question stem.
For example ...
Premise Main conclusion Premise/conclusion
Find the answer choice that correctly expresses the role

Answer Anticipation

On an Argument Structure question, an experienced test taker will first thoroughly deconstruct and understand the entire argument in the passage. Even though our job is to understand the role of the statement in the question stem, the benefits of understanding the whole argument are twofold. First, trying to figure out the role of the statement-in-question too early and without considering the entire argument can sometimes bias us and lead to an incorrect determination. Second, many answer choices will require us to know the roles of multiple propositions. (For instance, if the statement-in-question is a premise/conclusion, we'll probably also need to know which premise supports the premise/conclusion and which conclusion the premise/conclusion supports.) So, let's break down the anthropologists's entire argument, starting with the conclusion. The second part of the second sentence, which uses the pivot word "but," is the main conclusion. So, the conclusion asserts that ice-age nomads must have gotten food not from big-game hunting but from other sources like small animals and plants. The anthropologist supports this conclusion with three premises, further proving that the second part of the second sentence is the conclusion. The anthropologist claims that these ice-age nomadic communities needed 15-20 members to survive, these communities probably weren't much larger than 15-20 members, and big-game hunting would have risked the lives of these needed community members. In other words, big-game hunting was probably too risky for the community's well-being, so the community must have gotten their food from somewhere else. Now that we have broken down the entire argument, we can determine the role the statement-in-question serves. The statement-in-question is the first part of the second sentence. This claim says that ice-age nomads are commonly portrayed as primarily big-game hunters. As we saw, the anthropologist's conclusion rebuts this claim — the anthropologist argues that the ice-age nomads must have gotten their food from somewhere else. So, the statement from the question stem is a common portrayal that the anthropologist rebuts. Let's look for that in the answer choices.

Answer choices

  1. A
    It is a premise Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    Nope. The anthropologist's conclusion explicitly contradicts the statement-in-question, so the statement-in-question is definitely not a premise that supports the anthropologist's conclusion. Next!

  2. B
    It is a clarification Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    No. The statement-in-question doesn't "clarify" or help explain one of the anthropologist's premises. In fact, the anthropologist's premises are structured to show that the statement-in-question is untrue. Next!

  3. C
    It is an objection Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    Nuh-uh. This answer choice says the anthropologist uses the statement-in-question to show that an opposing theory is wrong. However, the statement-in-question is the opposing theory that the anthropologist rejects. Next!

  4. D
    It is the overall Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    Negative. The anthropologist's conclusion explicitly contradicts the statement-in-question, so the statement-in-question is definitely not the anthropologist's conclusion. Next!

  5. E
    It describes a claim Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem

    Finally, this answer choice matches our anticipation. The anthropologist tries to refute (or reject) the statement-in-question. The anthropologist argues that ice-age nomads didn't hunt big game because doing so would have endangered the lives of several critical members of the nomads' community.

Discussion

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.

View all discussions Start a discussion