Necessary AssumptionDiff: Hardest
Logic Breakdown
Passage Summary: People can't tell the difference between good and bad medical advice online, and the bad advice is easier to read, so they'll probably end up hurting themselves.
Conclusion: Relying on the internet for medical self-diagnosis is likely to be more harmful than beneficial.
Reasoning: Web users often cannot distinguish between scientific facts and quackery, and quackery is frequently written in a more clear and appealing way for laypeople.
Analysis: The argument makes a leap from 'people are attracted to bad information' to 'people will be harmed by that information.' For this to be true, we must assume that people actually follow the bad advice they read and that following it leads to worse outcomes than doing nothing or seeing a doctor. Look for an answer that bridges the gap between the user's preference for clear writing and the physical harm they might suffer. If they read the quackery but never acted on it, the conclusion wouldn't hold water.
Conclusion: Relying on the internet for medical self-diagnosis is likely to be more harmful than beneficial.
Reasoning: Web users often cannot distinguish between scientific facts and quackery, and quackery is frequently written in a more clear and appealing way for laypeople.
Analysis: The argument makes a leap from 'people are attracted to bad information' to 'people will be harmed by that information.' For this to be true, we must assume that people actually follow the bad advice they read and that following it leads to worse outcomes than doing nothing or seeing a doctor. Look for an answer that bridges the gap between the user's preference for clear writing and the physical harm they might suffer. If they read the quackery but never acted on it, the conclusion wouldn't hold water.
Passage Stimulus
Passage Redacted
Unlock Full Passage11.Which one of the following is an assumption the argument requires?
Correct Answer
B
This supplies the needed bridge: If people attempt to diagnose and do not rely exclusively on scientifically valid information, they’re likely to harm themselves. Given that many web users can’t discriminate, and quackery is appealing, it becomes likely they won’t rely exclusively on valid information—so harm is likely. Negation test: If it’s false that harm is likely unless one relies exclusively on scientifically valid info, then even when people mix in quackery they wouldn’t be likely to harm themselves, which collapses the argument’s conclusion.
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