Necessary Assumption
Help Questions
LSAT Logical Reasoning › Necessary Assumption
A law degree is necessary to practice as an attorney. Further, no one who has demonstrated moral turpitude may be admitted to practice law. Consequently, Smith, who was convicted of embezzlement several years ago, cannot be admitted to practice law.
The argument follows logically if which of the following is assumed?
Embezzlement demonstrates moral turpitude.
Embezzlement raises issues of integrity which can bar someone from practicing as an attorney.
Embezzlement is a serious crime.
Behavior that demonstrates moral turpitude includes the commission of certain crimes.
Smith's conviction is nor revocable.
Explanation
To answer this question, it is necessary to realize that the criteria to practice law requires that a person not demonstrate moral turpitude. Therefore, there has to be a link between Smith's embezzlement and the moral turpitude. Therefore, if embezzlement demonstrates moral turpitude, then the argument flows logically.
A law degree is necessary to practice as an attorney. Further, no one who has demonstrated moral turpitude may be admitted to practice law. Consequently, Smith, who was convicted of embezzlement several years ago, cannot be admitted to practice law.
The argument follows logically if which of the following is assumed?
Embezzlement demonstrates moral turpitude.
Embezzlement raises issues of integrity which can bar someone from practicing as an attorney.
Embezzlement is a serious crime.
Behavior that demonstrates moral turpitude includes the commission of certain crimes.
Smith's conviction is nor revocable.
Explanation
To answer this question, it is necessary to realize that the criteria to practice law requires that a person not demonstrate moral turpitude. Therefore, there has to be a link between Smith's embezzlement and the moral turpitude. Therefore, if embezzlement demonstrates moral turpitude, then the argument flows logically.
A medical degree is necessary for appointment to the hospital's board of directors. Further, no one having more than a five-percent equity stake in a pharmaceutical company can be appointed to the board of directors. Consequently, Dell, a practicing physician with a PhD in bioethics, cannot be appointed the hospital's treasurer, since he owns fifteen percent of PillCo, a pharmaceutical company.
The argument’s conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
Only those eligible for appointment to the hospital's board of directors can be appointed as the hospital's treasurer.
Anyone with a medical degree who does not hold more than a five-percent stake in any pharmaceutical company is eligible for appointment to the hospital's board of directors.
A PhD is not necessary for appointment to the position of treasurer.
If Dell sold his stake in PillCo, he would be appointed treasurer.
PillCo is one of the hospital's pharmaceutical vendors.
Explanation
To answer this question, it is necessary to recognize that while appointment criteria are set forth for the board of directors, they are applied to the position of Treasurer. We are never told that a Treasurer is a member of the board of directors. Thus, the conclusion is only warranted if eligibility for appointment to the board is a necessary condition for appointment to the position of Treasurer.
A medical degree is necessary for appointment to the hospital's board of directors. Further, no one having more than a five-percent equity stake in a pharmaceutical company can be appointed to the board of directors. Consequently, Dell, a practicing physician with a PhD in bioethics, cannot be appointed the hospital's treasurer, since he owns fifteen percent of PillCo, a pharmaceutical company.
The argument’s conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
Only those eligible for appointment to the hospital's board of directors can be appointed as the hospital's treasurer.
Anyone with a medical degree who does not hold more than a five-percent stake in any pharmaceutical company is eligible for appointment to the hospital's board of directors.
A PhD is not necessary for appointment to the position of treasurer.
If Dell sold his stake in PillCo, he would be appointed treasurer.
PillCo is one of the hospital's pharmaceutical vendors.
Explanation
To answer this question, it is necessary to recognize that while appointment criteria are set forth for the board of directors, they are applied to the position of Treasurer. We are never told that a Treasurer is a member of the board of directors. Thus, the conclusion is only warranted if eligibility for appointment to the board is a necessary condition for appointment to the position of Treasurer.
It is wrong to condemn the eating of lobster. Lobsters do not have the kind of cognitive abilities that permits meaningful self-awareness, and that sort of cognitive ability is essential to experience suffering.
The conclusion above follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
Only sentient beings that can experience suffering ought to be considered outside the realm of edible food for humans.
Any sentient beings that can experience suffering deserve to be treated respectfully.
Only organisms that are self-aware can experience suffering.
Any sentient being that can experience suffering must necessarily have highly developed cognitive abilities.
If lobsters ought not to be eaten because they can experience suffering, then the same is true with respect to pigs.
Explanation
The assumption must speak to the issue of “experiencing suffering,” since that is the missing term in the conclusion. The correct answer links that new term to the conclusion regarding what humans ought to eat and not eat. Thus, the correct answer is: Only sentient beings that can experience suffering ought to be considered outside the realm of edible food for humans.
Standard sheets of printer paper do not vary in the amount of wood pulp that they contain. Twenty-five percent of the wood pulp contained in a certain class of sheets of standard printer paper (Class B) was recycled from used sheets of standard printer paper of a different class (Class A). Since all Class A sheets were recycled into Class B sheets and since the amount of material other than wood pulp in a sheet of standard printer paper is negligible, it follows that Class B contains 4 times as many sheets of paper as Class A.
The conclusion of the argument follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
When a sheet of standard printer paper is a recycled, all of its wood pulp is recovered.
Class B sheets of paper cannot be recycled further.
Unrecycled wood pulp is of better quality than recycled wood pulp.
All of the paper in Class A had been made from recycled wood pulp.
The percentage of wood pulp in a sheet of standard printer paper that can be recovered during recycling varies depending on how such paper was used.
Explanation
Since 25 percent of wood pulp in the Class B sheets comes from recycled Class A sheets, the maximum number of Class B sheets is 4 times the number of Class A sheets. However, the correct answer correctly notices that the maximum number of Class B sheets can be produced only if all pulp from the Class A sheets can be recovered through recycling; if less than all of the pulp can be recovered, the actual number of Class B sheets produced will fall short of the maximum. For example, if there were 100 Class A sheets recycled, but only 25 percent of pulp could be recovered through recycling, only 100 Class B sheets could be produced.
Among the various models of racing cars used in top-level racing competitions, one cannot predict a car's ability to reach maximum speed simply by the horsepower of the motor. The efficiency of a motor's fuel-injection system varies significantly, even between racing cars with motors of comparable horsepower.
The argument's conclusion is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?
For each race car, the efficiency of its fuel-injection system has a significant impact on how quickly it can reach maximum speed.
It is possible to infer the power of a car's motor by examining the efficiency of its fuel-injection system.
All cars that reach maximum speed within six seconds have comparable motors in terms of their horsepower.
For any two race cars with comparable fuel-injection systems, the one with the more powerful motor will reach maximum speed more quickly.
It is not possible to assess how quickly a race car can reach maximum speed without knowing how powerful is its motor.
Explanation
The conclusion of this argument speaks to the ability to predict a race car's quickness in reaching maximum speed---horsepower alone won't permit an accurate prediction. Why? The argument states that the efficiency of the fuel-injection system varies among comparable cars. This suggests that the fuel-injection system is a critical factor in a car's ability to reach maximum speed. And that indeed is the unstated assumption. The "efficiency of the fuel-injection system" is the key term in the evidence portion of the argument that is not stated in the conclusion, and it is that key term that must be contained in the assumption. Any answer choice that does not mention that key term can be immediately eliminated.
It is wrong to condemn the eating of lobster. Lobsters do not have the kind of cognitive abilities that permits meaningful self-awareness, and that sort of cognitive ability is essential to experience suffering.
The conclusion above follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
Only sentient beings that can experience suffering ought to be considered outside the realm of edible food for humans.
Any sentient beings that can experience suffering deserve to be treated respectfully.
Only organisms that are self-aware can experience suffering.
Any sentient being that can experience suffering must necessarily have highly developed cognitive abilities.
If lobsters ought not to be eaten because they can experience suffering, then the same is true with respect to pigs.
Explanation
The assumption must speak to the issue of “experiencing suffering,” since that is the missing term in the conclusion. The correct answer links that new term to the conclusion regarding what humans ought to eat and not eat. Thus, the correct answer is: Only sentient beings that can experience suffering ought to be considered outside the realm of edible food for humans.
Standard sheets of printer paper do not vary in the amount of wood pulp that they contain. Twenty-five percent of the wood pulp contained in a certain class of sheets of standard printer paper (Class B) was recycled from used sheets of standard printer paper of a different class (Class A). Since all Class A sheets were recycled into Class B sheets and since the amount of material other than wood pulp in a sheet of standard printer paper is negligible, it follows that Class B contains 4 times as many sheets of paper as Class A.
The conclusion of the argument follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
When a sheet of standard printer paper is a recycled, all of its wood pulp is recovered.
Class B sheets of paper cannot be recycled further.
Unrecycled wood pulp is of better quality than recycled wood pulp.
All of the paper in Class A had been made from recycled wood pulp.
The percentage of wood pulp in a sheet of standard printer paper that can be recovered during recycling varies depending on how such paper was used.
Explanation
Since 25 percent of wood pulp in the Class B sheets comes from recycled Class A sheets, the maximum number of Class B sheets is 4 times the number of Class A sheets. However, the correct answer correctly notices that the maximum number of Class B sheets can be produced only if all pulp from the Class A sheets can be recovered through recycling; if less than all of the pulp can be recovered, the actual number of Class B sheets produced will fall short of the maximum. For example, if there were 100 Class A sheets recycled, but only 25 percent of pulp could be recovered through recycling, only 100 Class B sheets could be produced.
Among the various models of racing cars used in top-level racing competitions, one cannot predict a car's ability to reach maximum speed simply by the horsepower of the motor. The efficiency of a motor's fuel-injection system varies significantly, even between racing cars with motors of comparable horsepower.
The argument's conclusion is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?
For each race car, the efficiency of its fuel-injection system has a significant impact on how quickly it can reach maximum speed.
It is possible to infer the power of a car's motor by examining the efficiency of its fuel-injection system.
All cars that reach maximum speed within six seconds have comparable motors in terms of their horsepower.
For any two race cars with comparable fuel-injection systems, the one with the more powerful motor will reach maximum speed more quickly.
It is not possible to assess how quickly a race car can reach maximum speed without knowing how powerful is its motor.
Explanation
The conclusion of this argument speaks to the ability to predict a race car's quickness in reaching maximum speed---horsepower alone won't permit an accurate prediction. Why? The argument states that the efficiency of the fuel-injection system varies among comparable cars. This suggests that the fuel-injection system is a critical factor in a car's ability to reach maximum speed. And that indeed is the unstated assumption. The "efficiency of the fuel-injection system" is the key term in the evidence portion of the argument that is not stated in the conclusion, and it is that key term that must be contained in the assumption. Any answer choice that does not mention that key term can be immediately eliminated.