QUESTION TEXT: Ornithologist: The curvature of the claws of modern…
QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption
CONCLUSION: The ornithologist claims that Archaeopteryx lived in trees.
REASONING: Archaeopteryx could perch in trees.
ANALYSIS: The ornithologist’s argument is pretty weak. He’s only established that Archaeopteryx could perch in trees. And perching in a tree isn’t the same as living in a tree.
The correct answer says that its necessary that the birds actually did use this tree-perching capability.
___________
- The argument could still work if birds were only indirect descendants of Archaeopteryx.
- CORRECT. If the Archaeopteryx didn’t make use of its curved claws then there’s no way it lived in trees.
- It doesn’t matter if there’s more than one way for a bird to live in trees. All that matters is that the Archaeopteryx was itself capable of living in trees.
- Whether or not an earlier bird existed doesn’t affect how the Archaeopteryx lived.
- The argument would be stronger if this were false and there was even more evidence.
Recap: The question begins with “Ornithologist: The curvature of the claws of modern”. It is a Necessary Assumption question. Learn how to master LSAT Necessary questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.
Leave a Reply