September 2009 LSAT Section 5 Question 11

Researcher: This fall I returned to a research site to recover the armadillos I had tagged there the previous spring...

Julie-V on July 29, 2019

Choice (C)

Hi LSAT Max, I'm having a hard time figuring out a good explanation for eliminating choice (C). Compared to (E), (C) definitely doesn't sound like the stronger choice, but I'm not sure if it's because the predators are irrelevant/doesn't weaken the notion of the armadillos moving to new territory. Thanks in advance for the help!

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Irina on July 29, 2019

@Julie,

This is a necessary assumption question, meaning we are looking for an answer choice that is necessary for the argument to follow logically. Let's break down the argument.

Pr: Most armadillos recaptured this fall were found near the location they were tagged last spring
C: Armadillos do not move rapidly into new territories

(C) has no impact on the validity of the conclusion. Even if predators did kill a few armadillos, the researcher would still be able to come to the same conclusion by observing that the vast majority of tagged armadillos were still in the same territory.

(E) is a necessary assumption and the correct answer choice. If armadillos did move into a new territory in summer and then came back in the fall, his conclusion that they do not move rapidly into new territories is false as they are clearly capable of moving territories every few months. This is why the argument requires us to assume that armadillos did not move away and come back between last spring and this fall.

Does this make sense? Let me know if you have any other questions.