October 2010 LSAT
Section 3
Question 2
Since there is no survival value in an animal's having an organ that is able to function when all its other organs ha...
Replies
Mehran on January 24, 2018
Hey there! Practice is key here. For each and every stimulus, make yourself identify whether it is an argument, and if it is, underline what you think the conclusion is. Remember that a conclusion is supported by one or more premises. Sometimes (but not always) conclusions are introduced by words like "thus," "therefore," "hence," "accordingly" or "so." Premises are introduced by words like "since," or "because," for example.As you have noticed, on those questions where you misidentify either the conclusion or the premise(s), you often end up with the wrong answer. Studying these mistakes, and looking hard at each and every stimulus, will allow you, over time, to develop confidence in your ability to correctly identify these key argument components.
sweingar on April 5, 2018
I'm having trouble keeping the premise and conclusion straight on this question, too. Is it not true that "speaking falsely is morally wrong" is a broader statement that's supported by the anecdotal story about Mark?Karry-Jiao on January 12, 2019
Also wondering why "speaking falsely is morally wrong" is not the conclusion?Courtney on January 29, 2021
I also chose E "speaking falsely is morally wrong" as the answer for this question too. Why is that not the conclusion?