#19 - In all mammalian species, the period of a young

[moshei24]

What question type is this question? I would think that it's MustX, but most of the choices don't seem to have to be true based on the stimulus. It seems more like which of the following can't the stimulus help to prove is true. It seems more like a StrengthenX.

I think this is the second time I've seen a stem like this.

Thanks!

[Jon Denning]

Hey moshe - from a categorization standpoint that's a Must Be True Except (MustX) question, where the four incorrect answers follow most logically/with the highest likelihood from the stimulus. However, from a purely operational standpoint it falls within that category a bit more closely to the idea of Most Strongly Supported rather than the more black-and-white/absolute Must Be True. But still a Must Except, and you can evaluate the answers based on how well supported they are from the information in the stimulus, eliminating those that are supported most convincingly.

[moshei24]

So I'm basically looking for the answer that I can't find any support for in the stimulus? If the answer choice has any support, it would be wrong? That's what this question seemed like to me...

[Steve Stein]

Basically--you're looking for the answer choice that has no support, direct or indirect, in the information from the stimulus.

I hope that's helpful!

~Steve

[moshei24]

Gotcha- it's different from a MustX; I'm looking for the choice that I can't argue for based on the stimulus, correct?

Thank you!

[r miller]

haven't had an opportunity to look at the question, but, speaking out of my ____, and generally about the question type, i would comment that this is a bit of a specialized category of must be true question. if you look at the lesson, the last example of the question stems gives you an example of one of these. i find a lot of students have trouble with this, because it isn't exactly the same as an absolute, cut and dried, find a firm conclusion, question stem and answer choice.

i find it helps to explain it as follows. but, one must be careful, as this explanation suggests a causal idea, which is not what we're looking for here.
in any event, the idea behind the question is that the discussion in the stimulus would most likely lead one (avoid causal suggestion here) to what next step in the reasoning? or, where is the speaker in the stimulus heading, what would most appropriately follow from what is being discussed. (although one cannot be sure, so it requires a review, as always, of all answers, and allows the lsat to give you a tougher question!)

you should see that this is a bit more difficult concept, because it places you in the mind of the speaker (or author), and forces you to assume a little bit as to where the discussion is headed, always a concern. reminds a little bit of the function question in reading comprehension.

well, we strayed into the philosophical there. sorry about that. better stick with jon and steve and get a good, direct, answer, lol!

hope that helps!

tx

[askuwheteau@protonmail.com]

Really confused with this one because more than one answer appears to be U (unsupported). Please examine my reasoning below and let me know what I'm missing here:

A: S (supported by the text as play helps the survival of the species)

B: U (non-mammalian concerns are tangential to the stimulus and non directly supported)

C: U (could be true)

D: U (mistaken negation of sentence 3s idea of: if engage in play then will be helped in survival and wellbeing as an adult)

E: U (inoffensive motions or actions are not supported by the text)

[Jeff Wren]

Hi askuwheteau,

While this question is categorized as Must Be True (Except), you should approach these answers with the understanding that 4 of these will have some support based on the stimulus while the correct answer will have no support.

Your analysis of Answer A and B look good.

For B, nonmammalian species are not discussed at all in the stimulus, and there is zero support for this answer based on the stimulus, which is why this is the correct answer.

For the remaining answers, you'll want to broaden your understanding of the scope of the stimulus in terms of what it says and implies about these play behaviors.

What the stimulus is describing is a causal relation between playful behavior when young and growth of neural connections that are indispensable for the adult mammal's survival and well-being.

For Answer C, the stimulus suggests that mammals that do not engage in this playful behavior during this crucial period of mental development when young may not develop "various complex patterns of movement, posture, and social response." While these are broad categories, these would likely include the skills needed to engage in such playful behavior as adults. In other words, if the mammals don't learn the behavior at the appropriate time of mental development, then they will miss out completely.

For Answer D, the relationship in the stimulus is causal rather than conditional. The playful behavior when young causes the growth in neural connections that are indispensable for the adult mammal's survival and well-being. If the cause (the playful behavior) is removed, then the effect will likely not occur. (Of course, there can be other causes for an effect, so we don't know for certain that the effect will not happen, but this seems likely based on the information provided in the stimulus as no other possible cause is mentioned.)

For Answer E, while "inoffensive" is not specifically mentioned in the stimulus, the word in this context means "not harmful." Since the young mammals are playing at behaviors that are necessary for survival as adults, then mammals who rely on hunting for survival as adults would play at hunting. In other words, they would pretend to hunt without actually causing any harm (perhaps with their siblings).

[askuwheteau@protonmail.com]

Jeff,

Your explanation was incredibly helpful. Thank you very much for taking time to explain how the implications are to be connected between stimulus and answer choices.