Q2 - Domestication of animals is a cooperative activity

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Flaw

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: Language developed primarily to facilitate animal domestication.
Evidence: Domesticating is a cooperative activity, which requires sophisticated communication. Language is a means of sophisticated communication.

Answer Anticipation:
If we're doing a Flaw question, and we see conditional language, we should immediately be on high alert for the Conditional Logic flaw.

It's pretty subtle here, but "require" in the second claim is conditional.
The author is saying, "D requires CA, and language provides CA."
Had the author have concluded "Thus, D requires language", it would be the Conditional Logic flaw.

Our author is doing something nearby, because she definitely assumes that language (one POSSIBLE sophisticated means of communication) WAS in fact the sophisticated means of communication used. But the author's conclusion is not only assuming that language WAS the means used but also that language was PRIMARILY for animal domestication.

We could object
"what if some OTHER sophisticated means of communication was used to domesticate animals".
And we could object
"even if language was the means of communication used to domesticate animals, why do we need to assume that domesticating animals was the #1 reason for developing language? Maybe mating or hunting was #1 and domesticating animals just piggybacked?"

Correct Answer:
E

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) We could accuse the author of assuming that one possible means of meeting a requirement (sophisticated form of communication) was the only possible means. But the phrase "development of a phenomenon" alludes to the development of language, and nothing in the argument discussed something required of language or something that would guarantee language.

(B) This is an extreme assumption. The author doesn't need to assume that every phenomenon has a unique cause.

(C) Does the author conclude that "the development of one phenomenon caused the development of another"? Eh. Not really. He concludes that "one phenomenon developed primarily to assist with another." I would stop reading, but the "because" half definitely doesn't match the premise either.

(D) This refers to a Circular Argument, but this argument definitely had premises that were distinct in meaning from the conclusion.

(E) YES, this accurately matches a move the author made. The author assumes that since 'language' serves the purpose of domesticating animals (since the latter requires a complex form of communication like language), 'language' must have 'developed to facilitate', developed in order to serve that purpose.

Takeaway/Pattern: This was kind of mean for a #2, since the argument has at least three important flaws:
- just because language would satisfy the requirement doesn't mean language is what was used.
- even if language was used to domesticate animals, that doesn't mean language developed for that purpose
- even if language developed in part for that purpose, we don't have to think that was the PRIMARY reason for language's development.

#officialexplanation

[tw4jp]

Why would E be right with " must" in it? The conclusion is more subtle with" it is likely" & "primarily". However, I think this is the only choice address the flaw.

[ohthatpatrick]

I'm with you, but I think you answered your own question.

LSAT has just gotten (intentionally) sloppy over the past 10-15 tests. There are a lot of correct answers nowadays to Necessary Assumption that are technically worded more strongly than they should be.

However, they still accurately reflect a move the author made, and LSAT apparently thinks we should still be picking them as correct answers.

It's infuriating, from my point of view. The older tests are easier to defend on objective grounds. Correct answers to relative questions, "Which MOST strengthens / weakens / explain" have always sometimes been fishy, but correct answers to absolute questions, "Which is a flaw? Which must be assumed" used to be pretty bulletproof.

Similarly, correct answers in RC used to be almost always fully supported by the passage. Nowadays, there are some correct answers that are just "better" than others, but definitely not adequately supported.

So ... you just keep reminding yourself that you're looking for the "best available answer", even if it IS supposed to be an absolute task.

[ElissaG364]

Isn't really a conditional flaw? It seems like he is conflating necessary with sufficient. It says: domestication ----> language (since language is a means of communication) Therefore author concludes: language---> domestication. And according to answer choice A what is a"development of a phenomenon" does it refer to language or to the domestication of animals? Also, can we assume that "guaranteeing the development of that phenomenon" refers to Sufficient Assumption? (not for this particular question only, but in general) Thank you!