Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Garden Path Press sells books that tell you to compost but don't explain the difference between hot and cold methods; since a book is bad if it skips the basics of composting, these books must be bad.

Conclusion: Some gardening books from Garden Path Press are flawed.

Reasoning: Some of these books recommend tilling and composting without explaining the difference between hot and cold composting, and any book that recommends composting without explaining the basics is flawed.

Analysis: The argument has a clear 'missing link' between the specific omission (hot vs. cold composting) and the general rule (explaining the basics). For the conclusion to be true, the author must assume that the difference between hot and cold composting is actually a 'basic' of composting. If it were an advanced or optional topic, the books wouldn't necessarily be 'flawed' under the stated rule. Look for an answer that explicitly connects the hot/cold distinction to the definition of 'basics.'

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

12.

The argument requires the assumption that

Correct Answer
C
C supplies the bridge: explaining the basics requires explaining hot vs. cold (B → H). That yields not H → not B, so with R and not B, the principle implies “flawed,” validating the conclusion. Negation test: if basics do not have to include hot vs. cold, then a GP book could be R and not H yet still B, so it wouldn’t be flawed; the argument would fail. Hence C 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