Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Since things like a famous name or high production costs can drive up a wine's price, you can't assume that just because a bottle is expensive, it's actually good.

Conclusion: A high price for a bottle of wine is not a reliable indicator of its quality.

Reasoning: The cost of wine is influenced by factors like the vineyard's reputation and labor costs, rather than just the quality of the wine itself.

Analysis: The argument identifies a 'gap' between the factors that determine price and the factors that determine quality. For the conclusion to be true, the argument must assume that a vineyard's reputation is not perfectly correlated with the quality of every bottle it produces. If a prestigious reputation always guaranteed high quality, then an expensive wine from a prestigious vineyard would always be good, which would destroy the author's conclusion. Look for an assumption that separates 'reputation' or 'cost' from 'intrinsic quality.'

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

9.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

Correct Answer
C
C is necessary. If vineyard reputation did always indicate quality, then a reputation-based price increase would still track quality, and the claim that expensive wine is not always good would collapse. Negation test confirms that negating C destroys the argument.
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
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep