QUESTION TYPE: Necessary Assumption
CONCLUSION: The mayor isn’t introspective.
REASONING: She makes assertions with utter certainty and confidence.
ANALYSIS: The author is clearly assuming that “people who make confidence assertions aren’t introspective”. But, they utterly failed to link those two terms.
- CORRECT. If this isn’t true, then we have no way to prove the mayor lacks introspection.
Negation: Introspective people do make assertions with utter certainty and confidence.
- We don’t care whether the mayor is popular. We only care whether she is introspective.
- This doesn’t matter.
1. The argument did imply this is true, without stating it, but
2. It wasn’t the core assumption. The argument’s core claim is that assertions made “with utter certainty and confidence” are what show that the mayor lacks introspection.
[“these kinds of assertions…..demonstrate” is the language linking the evidence with the conclusion]
- The author is claiming: confident –> introspective
This answer is just the incorrect negation of that, it says: “confident –> introspective”
This is a type of trap answer. It has the right words, but uses them in the wrong way.
- Popularity doesn’t matter. The argument is only about the link between assertions and introspection. (Popularity was only mentioned as a reason for why the assertions might have helped the mayor win.)
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly