Passage Summary: If you don't have a will, the law gives your money to relatives you don't even know instead of your best friends, so you really should get a will.

Conclusion: Everyone ought to have a legal will to dictate how their estate is distributed.

Reasoning: In the absence of a will, current laws give distant, unknown relatives priority over close friends in the distribution of an estate.

Analysis: This argument relies on a 'Necessary Assumption' regarding what people value. The author assumes that most people would prefer their friends to inherit their estate rather than distant relatives they've never met. If a person actually preferred their distant relatives to inherit, the author's reasoning for why they 'ought' to have a will would fall apart. Look for an answer that confirms this preference or suggests that the legal default is generally undesirable to the individual.