June 1991 LSAT Section 3 Question 13

The term "pit bull" does not designate a breed of dog, as do the terms "German shepherd" and "poodle." It is like the...

lauraduffy700 on May 10 at 05:26PM

Support for this answer choice?

I am unclear how the argument supports the main point "a dog is a pitbull because of what it does, not because of it's breed..."

Replies

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

Already have an account? log in

lauraduffy700 on May 10 at 05:28PM

I selected the answer choice "German shepards can function both as police dogs and seeing eye dogs"... I didn't think this answer choice was clearly supported either because it uses the word "both" when it should be "either" given the example. But, I didn't see how any of the other statements were supported any better by the stimulus

Emil-Kunkin on May 17 at 01:53PM

That's what the passage is trying to convince us of. This is a synthesis of the first two sentences, that pit bull is not a breed of dog, but it is more like occupation-designating terms such as police dog.

Emil-Kunkin on May 17 at 01:54PM

While not common, it does occasionally happen that the conclusion is split up between two sentences as is the case here.