LSAT 153 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q2

LR Question 2 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Biologist: Some small animals will instinctively go limp…

QUESTION TYPE: Paradox

PARADOX: Small animals “play dead” when faced with a predator. But predators intend to eat the animal regardless, so why would this have survival value?

ANALYSIS: This question poses an interesting issue. We can assume that there is a reason that the small animals are playing dead, and that it does help their chances of survival. We will be looking for an answer which explains how playing dead helps small animals avoid being eaten.

___________

1. This answer tells us reasons why an animal might play dead, but not how it helps them survive.
2. CORRECT. If a predator isn’t eating its prey immediately, playing dead would help the animal escape. The predator would typically kill the prey and then hide it. But if the predator believes the prey to be already dead, the predator would skip the killing step and hide its “food” – allowing the prey to escape.
3. We are not seeking to find out when a small animal is more likely to play dead – that doesn’t tell us why they do it.
4. This answer does not resolve our paradox. Knowing that not all prey animals play dead does not tell us why playing dead works for the ones who do.
5. We don’t care about animals who don’t play dead. We are asking why playing dead is advantageous, not what other animals do to escape predators.

Recap: The question begins with “Biologist: Some small animals will instinctively go limp”. It is a Paradox question. Learn more about LSAT Paradox questions in our guide to LSAT Logical Reasoning question types.