LSAT 139 | Section 1 | Logical Reasoning: Q23

LR Question 23 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Anthropologist: Every human culture has taboos against…

QUESTION TYPE: Method of Reasoning

CONCLUSION: It’s not necessarily true that cultures ban people from eating some animals because those animals are useful.

REASONING: It’s possible. But it’s also possible that cultures find other uses for animals because they can’t eat them.

ANALYSIS: The anthropologist shows that the evidence for the conclusion is also consistent with a completely opposite explanation.

The anthropologist hasn’t proven the conclusion is wrong. They’ve just proven it isn’t necessarily right.

___________

1. CORRECT. This is the best description. The evidence supports multiple conclusions. So more evidence is needed.
2. The anthropologist didn’t prove that the conclusion is false. They say ‘might’, in the second-to-last line. They proved the argument isn’t necessarily true, but that’s not the same as proving it wrong.
3. The author hasn’t shown the alternate explanation is more plausible. They say ‘might’, twice; they’re uncertain. The author’s point was that another hypothesis was just as plausible.
4. They haven’t shown any evidence incompatible with the researchers’ argument. They’ve used the same evidence to show an alternative hypothesis is plausible.
5. Not quite right. The anthropologist is doing more than switching the sequence of events. They’re saying one of the events might not have occurred.The original events were: discover animals worth more alive, create taboo against using animals.The alternate events were: Create taboo, find other uses.