LSAT 36, Logical Reasoning I, Q3, LSATHacks

LR Question 3 Explanation, by LSATHacks

QUESTION TEXT: Finnish author Jaakko Mikkeli was accused by Norwegian…

QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption

CONCLUSION: Mikkeli argues that he could not have plagiarized Halden's book.

REASONING: The book was published in a foreign language that Mikkeli does not speak. And no one ever published a review of Halden's book.

ANALYSIS: Mikkeli's defense assumes that there is no other way he could have learned about the book.

___________

1. It's possible to meet someone without stealing all of their ideas.
2. It doesn't matter if the book became popular in Norway as long as it didn't become popular in Sweden, where Mikkeli lived.
3. CORRECT. If some Norwegian friend told Mikkeli the book's story then Mikkeli could have plagiarized it based on those details.
4. This would help Mikkeli but it isn't necessary.
5. Even if Mikkeli could read Old Icelandic that doesn't necessarily mean he could read Norwegian.

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.