LSAT 125 – Section 2 – Question 15

LSAT 125 - Section 2 - Question 15

June 2008

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:04

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT125 S2 Q15
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
A
6%
157
B
8%
156
C
4%
155
D
1%
151
E
80%
164
140
149
158
 +Medium 145.417 +SubsectionEasier

Humans are supposedly rational: in other words, they have a capacity for well-considered thinking and behavior. This is supposedly the difference that makes them superior to other animals. But humans knowingly pollute the world’s precious air and water and, through bad farming practices, deplete the soil that feeds them. Thus, humans are not rational after all, so it is absurd to regard them as superior to other animals.

A
relies crucially on an internally contradictory definition of rationality
There’s nothing contradictory about the definition — the capacity for well-considered thinking and behavior. This definition makes logical sense. The author tries to show that human behavior doesn’t fit this definition, but that doesn’t mean the definition is contradictory.
B
takes for granted that humans are aware that their acts are irrational
The author assumes that humans act in ways that aren’t well-considered. But the author doesn’t assume humans are aware this behavior is allegedly irrational. The definition of “rational” doesn’t involve humans’ awareness of rationality.
C
neglects to show that the irrational acts perpetrated by humans are not also perpetrated by other animals
The author never suggested animals are not also irrational. So he didn’t need to show that animals aren’t irrational.
D
presumes, without offering justification, that humans are no worse than other animals
The author concludes that humans are not superior to other animals. That doesn’t mean the author believes humans cannot be worse. If humans are worse than animals, that doesn’t undermine the author’s position.
E
fails to recognize that humans may possess a capacity without displaying it in a given activity
The author fails to realize that humans may possess a capacity (for well-considered thinking/behavior) without displaying it in a given activity (various activities that hurt the environment). One can possess the ability to do something even if one doesn’t always do it.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 125 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply