Q8 - Given the shape of the hip and foot bones

[mshinners]

Question Type:
ID the Flaw

Stimulus Breakdown:
The bones of the Kodiak allow for natural standing/walking. Therefore, this behavior is instinctive, not learned.

Answer Anticipation:
There's a leap here between something being allowed for and something being instinctual. It's possible the bones are designed in a way that allows for certain behavior that’s not a part of that animal's instincts. For instance, our bones allow us to naturally ice skate, but anyone who's ever embarrassed themselves at an ice skating party knows it's definitely not instinctual.

In short, this argument concludes that something is nature, when it could have been nurture. On the LSAT, the correct answer to this question almost always brings up the possibility that it's a mixture of nature and nurture.

Correct answer:
(B)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Wrong flaw (Bad Generalization). The entire answer speaks abstractly, not about a few specific Kodiaks. Even if you read this as stating the argument jumps between Kodiaks and all bears, a quick check of the conclusion would show you that the conclusion is just about Kodiaks.

(B) Boom. Walking/standing is possibly both nature and nurture. This is the possibility the stimulus ignores, so it's our answer.

(C) Wrong flaw (Equivocation). Both instances of behavior are related to specific actions taken by the bear.

(D) Degree/wrong flaw (False Choice). Tempting answer because it sounds like what the argument is doing - stating that something is either nature or nurture, not both. However, this answer allows the possibility of both, and that possibility is the one ignored by the stimulus. Additionally, the stimulus only speaks to one type of behavior, not all behavior, so there's a degree issue as well.

(E) This is not a flaw. (I mean, I'm sure you could appeal to the authority of science for non-scientific information, but I'm going to stick with appealing to science isn't a flaw!)

Takeaway/Pattern:
When the LSAT is making a nature vs. nurture argument, it almost always concludes that one of them is the exclusive influence. The correct answer is almost always that it might have been a mix of the two.

#officialexplanation