Q19 - In all mammalian species

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

This is a Must Be True, Except question, at least that's probably how this question would classified, but I think it's better to think of this one slightly different.

4 answer choices = must be true (and I think in this case it's best to the think of these as most strongly supported rather than absolutely, positively true)

1 answer choice = could be false (not supported)

It's definitely possible that all 5 answer choices could be true. We're just looking for the only answer choice that is not supported.

The statements fundamentally connect youthful play in mammals with complex movement, posture, social response and survival skills.

(A) connects youthful play with complex movement
(B) discusses nonmammalian animals and is irrelevant.
(C) connects youthful play with social response
(D) connects youthful play with survival skills
(E) connects youthful play with survival skills

Your reasoning for selecting answer choice (B) was perfectly valid. We were looking to extract information from the statements and use that information to discover which answer choice was least supported. Since the stimulus did not mention nonmammalian animals, answer choice (B) could not be supported by the stimulus.

[hychu3]

Hi,

Wouldn't this better be classified as Principle-Example question?

I was initially confused by this problem because, the way the question is phrased, it does sound like a Must Be True-EXCEPT problem.

But none of the problems, which are clearly way more specific in details than the passage, has to be true based on the passage.

It looks like the problem writers asked us to find an example least consistent with the quasi-principle mentioned.

[mornincounselor]

Gosh, it just seems such a stretch to conclude that adults mammals (who did play) are more likely to engage in interactive play with their young based on the premises given. This teaching skill doesn't seem connected to the "mammal's survival" nor "well-being."

Of course the premises given tells us nothing about the young of "non mammalian species" so we must therefore say that the argument serves as at least a minimal amount of evidence in support of choice c.

[Mab6q]

Has this type of except question ever appeared again on the modern LSAT, does anyone know by any chance??

[Yu440]

Hi,

I chose C for this question because I thought B was more relevant here than C.

Okay I probably made too much assumptions. I thought that young non mammals don't play in the same way strengthens the fact that these playful behaviors helps with mammals' future survival: since these species will survive differently as adults, of course they would play differently when young.

Why is C relevant? Thanks

[ohthatpatrick]

The question stem is just asking, "Which of these has the least textual support from the paragraph?"

(C) has a little bit of support, since we learned that when mammals play when they're young, it helps their brain develop patterns of movement, posture, and social response. And we learn that play as a child sets an adult up for better survival / well-being as an adult.

So from that we have some thin support for the notion that adult mammals who played as children would have both the neurally encoded patterns of movement/posture/social response engendered by play as well as potentially an appreciation for how play connects with adult life.

Since adult mammals would be more "wired" from play, they would be more "wired" for play?

In the end, (C) wins because at least we DISCUSSED adult mammals.

(B) is the least supportable claim because the paragraph is only about mammals and doesn't say anything to indicate that anything we learning is specific / distinct to mammals.

Hence, there is ZERO support for making any inference about nonmammals.

Very weird feeling question overall.