Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 32.1K All Categories
- 27.1K LSAT
- 16.5K General
- 5.1K Logical Reasoning
- 1.3K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 72 Podcasts
- 193 Webinars
- 9 Scholarships
- 193 Test Center Reviews
- 2K Study Groups
- 108 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.4K Specific LSAT Dates
- 7 June 2024 LSAT
- 1 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 23 January 2024 LSAT
- 37 November 2023 LSAT
- 41 October 2023 LSAT
- 12 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 1 August 2024 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 4.8K Not LSAT
- 3.9K Law School Admissions
- 11 Law School Explained
- 9 Forum Rules
- 580 Technical Problems
- 275 Off-topic
PT33.S1.Q20 - Recently discovered prehistoric rock paintings...
Ashley2018-1
Alum Member
To attack the premise or not to attack the premise
I keep hearing over and over again that I'm not supposed to attack the premise but this question from the weakening portion of LR seems to do just that. Doesn't answer choice D attack the premise? If the argument concludes that it couldn't be the case that the cave paintings depicted the current diets of the painters since they must have needed to eat sea animals during the long journey there, wouldn't D attack that premise since it's saying maybe not?
Admin Note: https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-33-section-1-question-20/