NVM! answered thanks
I looked for a conclusion for this problem and picked:
They do not rely solely on oxygen held in their lungs, but also store extra oxygen in their blood.
because I could throw a therefore before it as the last sentence and it kind of works. Why is this wrong? Got the question wrong because I didn't set up the core correctly.
PT37, S2, Q20 - LR Forum
-
jayashae
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 2:57 pm
PT37, S2, Q20 - LR
Last edited by jayashae on Mon Feb 16, 2015 10:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
sox49
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 7:19 pm
Re: PT37, S2, Q20 - LR
the question stem asks you to strengthen the researcher's hypothesis, which is stated very clearly in the stimulus : "some researchers hypothesize..."
-
Jeffort
- Posts: 1888
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm
Re: PT37, S2, Q20 - LR
If you ignore/delete the third sentence from the argument leaving you with only the first two, what you did would make sense since the second sentence is supported by the first and can be viewed as a subsidiary conclusion of the argument.
However, the third sentence extrapolates from there first by agreeing with the second sentence "Indeed,..." and then explicitly states the researchers conclusion which is what the question stem asks you to focus on. A hypothesis is the same thing as a conclusion, the words are synonyms when it comes to logical reasoning.
I'd say your main mistakes were ignoring the specific criteria stated in the question stem and taking a myopic view of the stimulus where you ignored the third sentence and how it functions within the context of the stimulus as a whole/how it logically relates to the other two sentences.
PS: You should edit your post and remove the text of the question since it's against TLS rules and violates LSAC's copyrights to LSAT questions.
However, the third sentence extrapolates from there first by agreeing with the second sentence "Indeed,..." and then explicitly states the researchers conclusion which is what the question stem asks you to focus on. A hypothesis is the same thing as a conclusion, the words are synonyms when it comes to logical reasoning.
I'd say your main mistakes were ignoring the specific criteria stated in the question stem and taking a myopic view of the stimulus where you ignored the third sentence and how it functions within the context of the stimulus as a whole/how it logically relates to the other two sentences.
PS: You should edit your post and remove the text of the question since it's against TLS rules and violates LSAC's copyrights to LSAT questions.
