PrepTest 142, Section 4, Question 8
Given the shape of the hip and foot(36 more words not shown)
To which one of the(7 more words not shown)
- AThe argument incorrectly(13 more words not shown)
- BThe argument fails(19 more words not shown)
- CThe word "behavior"(9 more words not shown)
- DThe argument presumes,(17 more words not shown)
- EThe argument incorrectly(12 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Does the shape of the bears' bones rule out learning?
Perhaps young bears learn to walk upright from their parents. We also haven't been told how their bones developed. Could practicing the movement while growing affect their shape? That's a possibility to investigate, not something we've established about bear anatomy. It shows why a description of the bones alone doesn't settle the history of the behavior.
What we’re looking for
The argument accepts that standing and walking upright is natural for these bears, then insists it isn't learned. For the flaw question, I'd challenge that second step. What has actually ruled out teaching or practice? The physical evidence doesn't tell us that learning played no part.
Working the answers
- A
The passage doesn't describe observing a few bears and projecting their behavior onto all Kodiaks. It bases its claim on the shape of their bones. Without the described small sample of behavior, A doesn't match the reasoning actually given.
- BCorrect
Learning and an inborn capacity could both contribute. The bones might make walking upright physically natural, while practice or instruction helps a bear develop the behavior. Those possibilities fit together.
The argument treats evidence for the natural capacity as though it excludes learning. But the evidence about anatomy doesn't settle whether a young bear must learn to use that capacity. B captures the possibility our objection raised.
- C
'Behavior' means what the bears do in both uses. The argument isn't switching from one meaning of that word to another. Its unsupported move concerns the source of the behavior, not the meaning of the word.
- D
The argument concerns one behavior of one kind of bear. It doesn't need a theory explaining every behavior in all animals. Also, our objection is that both learning and a natural capacity could contribute to this activity; D's broad claim about the available explanations doesn't identify that oversight.
- E
The author offers anatomical evidence, not merely 'a scientist said so.' Using that evidence isn't itself an improper appeal to authority. The problem is what the author concludes from it: suitable bones don't establish that learning contributes nothing.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.