WeakenDiff: Easy

Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Even though there are more seals and fewer cod, the seals don't really eat cod, so they probably aren't the ones killing them off.

Conclusion: The growth of the seal population is likely not the reason for the decrease in codfish.

Reasoning: Codfish make up only a tiny, insignificant portion of what seals actually eat.

Analysis: The argument assumes that the only way seals could hurt the cod population is by eating them directly. To weaken this, we need to find an indirect way that seals might be responsible for the cod's demise. Perhaps seals eat the same food as cod, or seals eat a different fish that the cod need to survive. Look for an answer that provides an alternative mechanism for the seals to negatively impact the cod population.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

5.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

Correct Answer
D
If seals eat a staple prey (capelin) that cod almost exclusively rely on, then more seals mean less capelin for cod, an indirect pathway by which seals’ increase could significantly contribute to cod decline despite negligible direct predation.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep