Home LSAT Prep LSAT Community
June 2016 LSAT - Section 3 - Question 17

Photographs show an area of Europa, a moon of Jupiter, where the icy surface appears to have buckled as a result of t...

g_cirelli February 18, 2020

Final Sentence

Would the statement: "The presence of such a sea is thought by scientists to be a primary factor in the early development of life, so there is reason to believe that there may be life on Europa" be considered another subsidiary conclusion?

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

Already have an account? log in

shunhe February 18, 2020

Hi @g_cirelli,

Thanks for the question! I would actually break this sentence up into two different claims. The first claim is that “The presence of such a sea is thought by scientists to be a primary factor in the early development of life.” This is just a premise. It’s used to support the conclusion, but nothing supports it. The second claim is that “there is reason to believe that there may be life on Europe.” This is the overall conclusion of the argument. We’re led to believe this from the other premises, such as the presence of a warm sea that’s been documented.

Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.

Gabriela-Diaz June 30, 2020

The presence of such a sea is thought by scientists to be a primary factor in the early development of life, so there is reason to believe that there may be life on Europa"
I chose E because the question stem just asks what role does the fact that warm water has been discovered play and so wouldnt the fact that there are warm waters just support "The presence of such a sea is thought by scientists to be a primary factor in the early development of life" (which is the subsidiary conlusion ) which in turn supports conclusion "so there is reason to believe that there may be life on Europa"
Please help clarify. thank you