LSAT 150 – Section 2 – Question 23

LSAT 150 - Section 2 - Question 23

June 2018

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:15

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
PT150 S2 Q23
+LR
Argument part +AP
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
14%
158
B
37%
161
C
45%
165
D
3%
154
E
1%
152
153
164
176
 +Hardest 145.632 +SubsectionMedium

It has been argued that the immense size of Tyrannosaurus rex would have made it so slow that it could only have been a scavenger, not a hunter, since it would not have been able to chase down its prey. This, however, is an overly hasty inference. T. rex’s prey, if it was even larger than T. rex, would probably have been slower than T. rex.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position

The author concludes that the theory that Tyrannosaurus rex was exclusively a scavenger is an overly hasty inference. As support for this conclusion, the author addresses a possibility that those who believe that T. rex was a scavenger fail to consider: that the prey of T. rex could be even larger than T. rex. If this was the case, then the prey would probably have been slower than T. rex. This possibility weakens the theory that T. rex was primarily a scavenger.

Identify Argument Part

The claim in the question stem is the inference that the author concludes was made too hastily.

A
It is a hypothesis that is claimed in the argument to be logically inconsistent with the conclusion advanced by the argument.

The conclusion advanced by the argument is just that the theory that T. rex was exclusively a scavenger is a hasty inference. There is no logical inconsistency here; the author is just asserting that the given evidence is not enough.

B
It is a hypothesis that the argument contends is probably false.

The author does not claim that the hypothesis in the question stem is probably false––this language is too strong. The author only claims that this hypothesis was “overly hasty,” meaning that we cannot make this conclusion from the information given.

C
It is a hypothesis that the argument attempts to undermine by calling into question the sufficiency of the evidence.

In asserting that the claim in the question stem is “overly hasty,” the author is saying that this claim doesn’t have enough support, not that it’s false. This is why (C) is correct––the author claims that the evidence is not sufficient to claim that T. rex was a scavenger.

D
It is offered as evidence in support of a hypothesis that the argument concludes to be false.

The claim in the question stem is the hypothesis that the author is discussing; it is not offered as evidence of a hypothesis.

E
It is offered as evidence that is necessary for drawing the conclusion advanced by the argument.

The statement in the question stem is the hypothesis that the author claims was an overly hasty inference; it is not offered as evidence.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 150 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply