#18 - A plausible explanation of the disappearance of the

[Jonathan Evans]

Yes, Jessamyn, that's a fair statement. If an answer choice on a Weaken or Strengthen question is just some variation of "someone disagrees" or "someone agrees," then you're probably safe eliminating that answer.

However, as usual, there are exceptions. If the argument is something like this...

• Many surveys of physicians indicate that good diet and regular exercise are the best way to maintain a healthy weight.
• Therefore, all physicians think good diet and regular exercise are the best way to maintain a healthy weight.

An answer choice like "Dr. Jones, a physician, thinks that taking ten diet pills every morning is the best way to maintain a healthy weight" would definitely weaken this conclusion!

Thus, yes, in general, specious appeals to authority usually are not very helpful, but you must pay attention to the specifics of any given argument.

[jennyli0804]

Hi,

I chose (B) because it seemed like the best answer, but I don’t see how it is a good answer. Just because some animals with similar physiology and habitats to dinosaurs didn’t become extinct, these animals still aren’t dinosaurs and the argument is specifically about dinosaurs. It could be that the very small differences between the dinosaurs and these other animals were enough to cause one species to become extinct and the other to survive the consequences of the comet collision.

Shouldn’t these other animals of similar physiology and habitats be considered irrelevant to the argument because they simply aren’t dinosaurs?

Thank you.

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Jenny,

It's great that you were able to determine that answer choice (B) was the best answer! We're always looking for the best answer on the LSAT, even if it's not an answer choice that we necessarily love so it's a good skill to be able to determine what those best answers are. But let's talk about why answer choice (B) is still a pretty good answer!

I can definitely see why you take issue with the answer choice being about other animal species rather than dinosaurs specifically, since that is what the stimulus argument is about. But for this type of causal Weaken question, we don't necessarily need the answer choice to be specifically about dinosaurs. Remember that in Weaken questions, you are trying to hurt the argument as much as possible, but you don't need to completely kill the argument.

Yes, answer choice (B) is not about dinosaurs specifically. But if there are other animals similar in physiology and habitat, they should have been affected by dust cloud-created climate change in the same way as the dinosaurs. Telling us that these animals had similar physiology tells us that they likely had the same basic needs as the dinosaurs in terms of temperature/respiration/food sources/etc. Telling us that they have the same habitats tell us that they were living in regions that would have been affected by climate change in the same way as the regions where the dinosaurs were living. So if these animals have the same basic living requirements and live in the same areas as the dinosaurs, then they should have been affected by climate change in the same way as the dinosaurs. The fact that they were not, weakens the argument by suggesting that there was something else, targeting dinosaurs more specifically, that caused their extinction.

Notice how answer choice (B) is different than answer choice (D). Answer choice (D) just refers to other animals, but doesn't specify that they have the same physiological and habitat requirements as the dinosaurs. This really underscores why (B) is such a better answer. It's not giving us just random animals, it's specifying that these animals are very similar to the dinosaurs.

Again, it doesn't totally kill the argument, but a good Weaken answer choice doesn't need to kill--it just needs to wound as best we can!

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[jennyli0804]

Thank you @KelseyWoods! I think I asked elsewhere on the Forum regarding the difference between “strengthening” an argument and “proving” an argument. What’s the difference between “weakening” and “killing” an argument? Thank you!

[Dave Killoran]

Thank you @KelseyWoods! I think I asked elsewhere on the Forum regarding the difference between “strengthening” an argument and “proving” an argument. What’s the difference between “weakening” and “killing” an argument? Thank you!

Hi Jenny,

The difference is what you probably suspect it is: "weakening" just hurts an argument in some way (doesn't matter how) whereas "killing" it renders it completely destroyed (which is a single, final result). On the LSAT, "killing" an argument is nearly impossible since it's hard to make that happen in short arguments.

Thanks!

[glasann]

I do understand why B weakens MORE than A, however I'm struggling to understand why A still does not weaken. I thought Weaken answers just needed to cast even the smallest shadow of a doubt, and A seems to be doing that by suggesting that there are alternative theories.

Aren't frequent correct answer choices for Weaken questions ones that provide alternative explanations and conclusions?

Are you able to give a little more color around A?

Thanks!

[Adam Tyson]

glasann, answer A would weaken the argument if the argument was saying that the comet theory was correct. But that's not what it's about. The argument is only about whether the comet theory is plausible - in other words, does it make some sense in light of the evidence? One group of paleontologists preferring a different theory might case a little doubt on the correctness of the comet theory, but tells us nothing at all about the plausibility of that theory. That's why answer A doesn't weaken the argument.

By way of analogy: one theory for why people are so drawn to me is that I am stunningly handsome. My wife thinks it is because I am charming and witty.

Has my wife's theory raised any doubts about whether my theory makes sense? Not at all! She could still admit that it's possible that people are drawn to my amazing good looks. She just doesn't believe that's the real attraction.

[glasann]

Hah! OK, that is helpful. Thank you.