LSAT 133 – Section 2 – Question 06

LSAT 133 - Section 2 - Question 06

June 2011

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:56

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT133 S2 Q06
+LR
+Exp
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Lack of Support v. False Conclusion +LSvFC
A
87%
166
B
2%
158
C
0%
149
D
2%
156
E
9%
159
131
142
154
 +Medium 147.633 +SubsectionMedium

J.Y.’s explanation

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Recently discovered bird fossils are about 20 million years older than the fossils of the birdlike dinosaurs from which the birds are generally claimed to have descended. So these newly discovered fossils show, contrary to the account espoused by most paleontologists, that no bird descended from any dinosaur.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The argument concludes that no birds descended from dinosaurs, counter to a common claim. This is based on the discovery that some bird fossils predate the fossils of dinosaurs from which birds were previously thought to have descended, so those birds couldn’t have descended from those dinosaurs.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The argument takes evidence proving that certain birds didn’t descend from certain dinosaurs to support a conclusion that no birds descended from any dinosaurs. However, it’s still totally possible that other birds were descended from those birdlike dinosaurs, or even that the newly discovered birds were descended from even older dinosaurs.

A
draws a generalization that is broader than is warranted by the findings cited
The argument generalizes that the entire hypothesis of birds descending from dinosaurs must not be true, based on findings that only disprove certain birds descending from certain dinosaurs.
B
rejects the consensus view of experts in the field without providing any counterevidence
The argument rejects a described consensus view of experts, but this is based on the provided counterevidence of bird fossils which predate the fossils of their claimed dinosaur ancestors.
C
attacks the adherents of the opposing view personally instead of addressing any reason for their view
The argument doesn’t make any personal attacks, and does address at least one reason for the opposing view.
D
fails to consider the possibility that dinosaurs descended from birds
The argument only attempts to counter the hypothesis that birds descended from dinosaurs. The possibility that dinosaurs descended from birds is irrelevant (and clearly absurd).
E
ignores the possibility that dinosaurs and birds descended from a common ancestor
There’s no need for the argument to consider this possibility. The argument is only concerned with countering the hypothesis that birds descended from dinosaurs, not with providing any other hypotheses about evolution.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 133 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply