Necessary AssumptionDiff: Easy
Logic Breakdown
Passage Summary: Patents give inventors exclusive rights to make money from their ideas. If anyone could just copy an invention, there would be no profit motive to create anything new, so we need patents to keep the cycle of innovation going.
Conclusion: Continuing to grant patent rights is essential to ensure that original development persists and new inventions are produced.
Reasoning: Patents prevent others from copying inventions, thereby maintaining the financial incentive necessary for inventors to invest their time and energy.
Analysis: This argument relies on a significant gap between financial motivation and the act of creation. It assumes that without the specific profit protection offered by patents, no other incentives—such as personal passion, government grants, or first-to-market advantages—would be enough to keep inventors working. To find the necessary assumption, look for an answer that bridges this gap by suggesting that financial incentive is a required condition for original development. If you negate the correct answer, it should effectively say that people would still invent things even without the financial protection of patents, which would cause the author's conclusion to fall apart.
Conclusion: Continuing to grant patent rights is essential to ensure that original development persists and new inventions are produced.
Reasoning: Patents prevent others from copying inventions, thereby maintaining the financial incentive necessary for inventors to invest their time and energy.
Analysis: This argument relies on a significant gap between financial motivation and the act of creation. It assumes that without the specific profit protection offered by patents, no other incentives—such as personal passion, government grants, or first-to-market advantages—would be enough to keep inventors working. To find the necessary assumption, look for an answer that bridges this gap by suggesting that financial incentive is a required condition for original development. If you negate the correct answer, it should effectively say that people would still invent things even without the financial protection of patents, which would cause the author's conclusion to fall apart.
Passage Stimulus
Passage Redacted
Unlock Full Passage1.Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
Correct Answer
A
A states that financial reward is the only effective incentive to motivate people to develop new inventions. This is necessary for the argument’s claim that without patents (and thus without financial reward), no one would invent. Negation test: if people can be effectively motivated by nonfinancial incentives, then even without patents some would invent, so the conclusion collapses.
Upgrade Your Prep
Ready to go beyond free explanations?
LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.
Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal