PT34.S3.Q17 - zoologist: animals can certainly signal

Barack Obama 2.0

Can someone elaborate on Why E is incorrect?
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-34-section-3-question-17/

Sarah889

Hey! I presume you mean section 3, right?

The argument is as follows:

P1: Animals can signal each other with sounds and gestures.
P2: This does not prove that animals possess the ability to use sounds or gestures to refer to concrete objects or abstract ideas.
C: The fact that animals can signal each other with sounds and gestures does not prove that animals possess language.

Let's take a look at P2, which says that, just because these animals signal to each other with sounds and gestures does not necessitate that they utilize those sounds and gestures to refer to concrete objects or abstract ideas. What can we know from that? Well, the zoologist seems to think that this idea of reference is necessary for something to be called a language. Signals are not enough. Sounds and gestures are not enough. They need to be components within a system of referencing either concrete objects or abstract ideas.

/SGCOAI --> /L

CP: L --> SGCOAI

(SGCOAI= Using sounds or gestures to refer to concrete objects or abstract ideas
L = Language)

So now, let's look at E. E says that some animals that possess a language can refer to both concrete objects and abstract ideas.

This is tricky answer because it plays on your understanding of the term "or." What is the necessary condition of possessing language? It is being able to refer to concrete objects or abstract ideas. "Or" means it can be one or the other, or it could be both. It does not have to be both. It could be that animals are able to refer to concrete objects and not abstract ideas, or visa versa. E requires that animals are able to refer to both concrete objects and abstract ideas. The argument simply does not require that.