Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Big bookstores pushed out the little guys, and because those little shops are gone, we don't have as many different kinds of books to choose from as we should.

Conclusion: The prosperity of large bookstore chains has resulted in a negative outcome for book buyers.

Reasoning:

Analysis: The argument assumes a direct link between the type of store and the diversity of the inventory. It ignores the possibility that a few massive chain stores could theoretically offer more titles than dozens of tiny independent ones. For the conclusion to hold, it must be true that independent stores provide a unique variety that chains simply do not replicate. Look for an answer that bridges this gap between store ownership and book selection.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

9.

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

Correct Answer
A
A supplies the needed value bridge: that consumers are better off with greater readily available variety. Negation test: If book consumers would not be better off with greater variety, then the fact that variety didn’t grow as much cannot show any “detriment,” so the argument fails. Therefore A is necessary.
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