LSAT 34, Logical Reasoning II, Q24, LSATHacks

LR Question 24 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Ringtail opossums are an Australian wildlife species…

QUESTION TYPE: Strengthen

CONCLUSION: The opossums are going extinct because of non-native predators rather than from a lack of food.

REASONING: 75% of opossums released from captivity were eaten by foxes.

ANALYSIS: This is a bad argument. The opossums were living in captivity. They may not have had a chance to learn how to survive amongst predators. Wild opossums might not get eaten by foxes often and lack of food might be a bigger problem for them.

___________

1. This doesn’t help, since the conclusion is that non-native predators are threatening the opossum. The conclusion would be stronger (slightly) if there were more non-native predators. 
2. All that matters is that the foxes adapted well enough to eat opossums. The fact that some other species adapted better does not strengthen the argument.
3. This doesn’t affect the fact that it was foxes that killed the opossums once they were released. We have no indication that food was an issue for these opossums.
4. This doesn’t matter. The conclusion was that non-native predators were harming the opossum. The opossums weren’t dying from lack of food. They were dying because foxes ate them.
5. CORRECT. This eliminates the possibility that the opossums raised in captivity were simply unprepared to deal with predators. 

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.