PrepTest 149, Section 4, Question 15
The ancient reptile Thrinaxodon , an ancestor of(52 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(38 more words not shown)
- AIt is a(21 more words not shown)
- BIt is a(12 more words not shown)
- CIt is a(20 more words not shown)
- DIt is a(12 more words not shown)
- EIt is offered(24 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Do those skull features really establish whiskers? Perhaps they served some other purpose. The passage says they suggest whiskers, which leaves us room to question that first step.
The author then builds a chain. Whiskers would go with hair elsewhere; that hair would regulate temperature; and such insulation would be of little use to a cold-blooded animal. Those claims lead to the judgment that Thrinaxodon was probably warm-blooded.
What we’re looking for
But we're being asked about the role of the whiskers-to-hair statement, not to resolve the doubts about the evidence. It supplies a connection needed to move from the skull observation toward the temperature conclusion. I'd look for an answer describing it as support for the main point.
Working the answers
- A
This identifies the wrong claim as the supported conclusion. The idea that insulation would be of little use to a cold-blooded animal is another reason in the argument. The whiskers-to-hair statement works alongside it to support probable warm-bloodedness; it isn't used to establish that insulation principle.
- BCorrect
The statement is a premise supporting the main conclusion that Thrinaxodon was probably warm-blooded. It connects the possible whiskers to insulating hair, which the author then treats as evidence about body temperature. Whether we find every link convincing is separate from recognizing that supporting role.
- C
The skull features are evidence that this animal may have had whiskers. They don't establish the general connection that having whiskers means having insulating hair elsewhere. The quoted statement supplies that connection as a premise; the argument doesn't derive it from the skull observation.
- D
The author relies on this statement, rather than trying to show it false. It is one of the steps used to reach the conclusion. Describing it as a hypothesis under attack gets the author's attitude toward it backward.
- E
The statement is being used to support the conclusion. It helps the author infer probable warm-bloodedness from evidence about whiskers and hair. E explicitly denies that evidential job and instead presents it as an explanation of an already established conclusion, which isn't how the argument proceeds.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.