QUESTION TYPE:Necessary Assumption (principle)
CONCLUSION: Some dogs come from more recently domesticated wolves.
REASONING: Some dogs are more closely related to wolves than other dogs are.
ANALYSIS: On necessary assumption questions, look for a shift in concept in the conclusion.
The conclusion says that some dogs were more recently domesticated. The evidence is that these dogs are more closely related to wolves, genetically.
The argument assumes that if a dog is more closely related genetically, then the domestication must be more recent. This is a hard argument, and frankly, most of the answers are nonsense. Focus on understanding the relationships in the stimulus.
- This refers to the wrong thing. We’re trying to conclude that some dogs descend from more recently domesticated wolves. This answer tells us what would happen if that were true.
- CORRECT. The negation of this answer breaks the implied link between being genetically related to wolves and being descended more recently from wolves.
Negation: A breed of dog could have more recent undomesticated wolf ancestors even if that breed of dog is less closely related to wolves than another breed.
- Negation: There’s one domesticated species of dog that’s more closely related to wolves than to dogs.
Who the hell cares? The argument was about when wolves were domesticated. This tells us nothing about date of domestication.
- Negation: How closely a dog is related to a wolf doesn’t affect how closely that dog is related to other dogs.
The argument was about domestication date, not how related two breeds of dog are.
- This doesn’t tell us if some wolves were domesticated more recently than others.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly