LSAT 6 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q12

LR Question 12 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Arguing that there was no trade between Europe and East Asia…

QUESTION TYPE: Main Point

CONCLUSION: Absence of evidence of trade is not evidence that there was no trade.

REASONING: The argument uses an analogy about the Yeti. We have no evidence that it exists, but that does not mean we have proven the Yeti is imaginary.

ANALYSIS: This is actually a good argument. Lack of evidence for an idea does not necessarily mean that the idea is wrong.

The main point is that we cannot conclude that these things did not exist.

___________

1. This is true, but the argument’s main point was that in neither case was the thing disconfirmed either.
2. The main point is that we can’t say that there was no trade.
3. CORRECT. Yes. We would need evidence that the trade did not exist to make that conclusion. All we have is a lack of evidence that it did exist.
4. This is the view that the stimulus argues against. We need more than a mere lack of references: we need actual evidence that there was no such trade.
5. This isn’t even necessarily true. There might be non-written evidence of such trade.

Recap: The question begins with “Arguing that there was no trade between Europe and East Asia”. It is a Identify The Conclusion question. Learn more about LSAT Identify questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.