#15 - For the condor to survive in the wild, its breeding

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Must be True. The correct Answer Choice is (D)

This Stimulus contains some conditional reasoning statements (Sufficient and Necessary). The first such statement is the initial sentence: if the condor is going to survive in the wild, then the breeding population must be increased. A second conditional relationship presented in the Stimulus is that if there is going to be any increase in the breeding population, then most of the eggs must hatch. The likelihood of the eggs hatching is impacted by environmental factors. The author suggests that one possible way to eliminate the effects of the environmental factors is to breed the birds in captivity and return them to the wild later.

One way to approach the Stimulus is to diagram:


Condors survive → breeding population must be increased; and

Breeding population increased → most eggs must hatch.


Putting the two statements together:


Condors survive → breeding population must increase → most eggs must hatch

Condors survive → most eggs must hatch


In plain English, if the condor is going to survive in the wild, most of its eggs must hatch.

The Question Stem asks which one of the following Answer Choices is most supported by the information above. This is a Must Be True type of question because it asks what inferences can be made from the information that is contained in the Stimulus. Whenever you have a SufNec Stimulus with a Must Be True question type, look for an Answer Choice that contains the contra-positive of the reasoning contained in the Stimulus.

The pre-formed answer is the contra-positive of the reasoning in the Stimulus. The contra-positive is:


Most eggs hatch → Condors survive


In plain English the contra-positive is if most eggs do not hatch, then the condors will not survive.

Answer Choice (A) says that the condor will eventually become extinct in the wild. If most of the eggs do not hatch, this is true, according to the reasoning in the Stimulus, but it assumes that most of the eggs do not hatch. The Stimulus gives no indication as to the likelihood of the eggs hatching or not. This Answer Choice is not the contra-positive of the reasoning in the Stimulus, and therefore, it is not the correct Answer Choice.

Answer Choice (B) states that the best way to save the condor in the wild is to breed it in captivity. This is a very attractive answer, but the Stimulus discusses that breeding in captivity is "one possible way" to eliminate effects of environmental factors that impact the breeding of the condor. It may very well be true that the best way to save the condor is to breed them in captivity, but that information is not contained in the Stimulus and requires additional information. Additionally, it is not the contra-positive of the reasoning contained in the Stimulus, and therefore, it is not likely to be the correct Answer Choice.

Answer Choice (C) states that it is almost impossible to eliminate all of the environmental threats to the eggs of the condors. The Stimulus does not discuss eliminating all of the threats – just reducing them as much as possible. This inference goes further than what is stated in the Stimulus and it is not the contra-positive of the reasoning contained in the Stimulus. Therefore, it is not likely to be the correct Answer Choice.

Answer Choice (D) This is the correct answer choice, as it states that if the condor eggs do not hatch, then the condor as a species will not survive in the wild. This is an exact reproduction of the contra-positive as stated above.

Answer Choice (E) states that the most feasible way to protect the condor from extinction is to increase egg production. The Stimulus does not discuss feasibility at all, only possibility. Additionally, the Stimulus does not discuss egg production; it does discuss getting more eggs to hatch, which should not be confused with egg production. Answer Choice (E) introduces two new concepts to the discussion and therefore it should be eliminated.

[vedan22]

When you analyzed the stimulus, how did you know to leave out the piece of information regarding environmental dangers? It seems like that is a condition of ensuring egg hatching. I selected answer choice C because it was the only answer choice that included this additional factor (though now that I review without the time pressure, I realize the language is too strong to be the correct answer). How can I avoid this trap in the future?

[AthenaDalton]

When you analyzed the stimulus, how did you know to leave out the piece of information regarding environmental dangers? It seems like that is a condition of ensuring egg hatching. I selected answer choice C because it was the only answer choice that included this additional factor (though now that I review without the time pressure, I realize the language is too strong to be the correct answer). How can I avoid this trap in the future?

You're on the right track by focusing on the strength of the language for each of the respective factors.

The prompt uses strong, unequivocal language with respect to the "surviving in the wild" and "hatching more eggs," while the "environmental factors" condition has some equivocal language -- that increasing the number of eggs hatching is "extremely unlikely in the wild due to environmental dangers."

Then answer (C) goes on to equate "extremely unlikely" with "almost impossible" -- too much of a stretch.

When you're analyzing a sufficient / necessary prompt, hone in on these differences in language that can be the difference between "condition X must occur" and "condition X may or may not occur."

Good luck!

Athena Dalton

[mattp72@gmail.com]

Why is answer E incorrect? Is feasability really that different from possibility?

Matt

[Francis O'Rourke]

Hi Matt,

The difference between feasible and possibility is that the former is indicates likelihood or ease. For example, if I tell you that it is possible to save an endangered tree frog if we stop all logging worldwide, then saving this tree frog possible. Whether it is feasible seems rather doubtful to me, since stopping all logging would be very difficult and unlikely to happen.

Additionally, we can compare how feasible two options are: e.g. option X is more feasible than option Y. We cannot however compare how possible two options are: option A is more possible than option B makes no sense.

In addition to the switch from possibility to feasibility in answer choice (E), One other factor that makes this choice incorrect is that the stimulus never discussed increasing egg production. It does discuss getting more eggs to hatch, which should not be confused with egg production.

[andriana.caban]

I'm having trouble identifying within the stimulus conditional reasoning statements, is there a strategy to help with this?

[Luke Haqq]

Hi Andriana!

There are definitely strategies and drills you can work on to improve with identifying conditional reasoning.

If you have PowerScore's full-length course books, the best detailed, foundational focus on conditional reasoning can be found in Lesson 2. See pages 2-1 to 2-18 in particular, which introduce conditional reasoning both for the purposes of logic games and for the purposes of logical reasoning.

The homework to Lesson 2, starting on page 2-37, also has plenty of conditional reasoning drills that you can use to test your understanding of the tips and principles in the lesson.

Within the Lesson 2 homework, I'd especially encourage you to look at 2-68. There's a useful table there that lists specific words commonly used on the LSAT to indicate a sufficient condition, and those commonly used to indicate a necessary condition. Some students find that memorizing these help them spot conditional reasoning quicker and diagram it more accurately. Lastly, given that words like "except," "unless," and other similar words can often make diagramming conditional reasoning tricky, Page 2-68 also usefully explains a strategy for breaking these down into manageable chunks.

Hope that helps!

[anthonyle17]

Hi,
I'm having trouble understanding why D, definitively, is the correct answer. I chose it as an answer, but only after eliminating the other four as being incorrect. The answer says that the condor as a species will not survive. Isn't there a possibility of the condor surviving even if more condor eggs don't hatch?

[Francis O'Rourke]

Hi Anthony,

If there is anything above in the Administrator's explanation that you'd like me to go over again, let me know. It looks like you are focusing on the relationship between 'eggs not hatching' and 'condor as a species will not survive'

The stimulus told us that in order to survive in the wild, the breading population must be greatly increased. That is the only way for the Condor to survive. The next sentence told us that any significant increase in the number of condors depends on getting most eggs to hatch, which currently is extremely unlikely to happen. So getting more eggs to hatch is the only way for the population to increase.

We can combine these statements into the following: If the condor survives, the breading population must increase, and if the population increases, more of the eggs must hatch.

• Condor survives breading pop increases more eggs hatch

Choice (D) simply states the end result of more eggs not hatching: If more eggs don't hatch, the breading population will not increase, so the Condor will not survive.

• more eggs do not hatch breading pop does not increases Condor does not survive

[LSAT2018]

I did not take the stimulus to be a chain of conditional statements because the first sentence concerns the breeding population (adults, presumably) while the second sentence concerns the number of birds (total). How can it be said that the increase in the breeding population depends on most of the eggs hatching? I ask for clarification on this.

I considered the first and second conditional statements to be separate, and used the contrapositive of the second statement to get to the correct answer. Would this be acceptable?