Question

Difficulty: Very hardNecessary Assumption

Botanist: To survive in the hyper-arid Atacama Desert, the Copiapoa cactus relies exclusively on regular coastal fog for hydration. However, recent atmospheric warming has permanently shifted this fog condensation layer to significantly higher altitudes, completely bypassing the low-lying valleys where the native Copiapoa populations are rooted. Because these cacti cannot survive for more than a few months without moisture, the only way to prevent the extinction of the Copiapoa in the wild is to artificially relocate the remaining populations to these higher elevations.

Evaluate the following statement: The botanist's argument depends on the assumption that artificially relocating the remaining Copiapoa populations to higher elevations will successfully prevent their extinction in the wild.

Answer: Answer

Answer

False
The proposed assumption represents a sufficient condition (relocation guarantees survival), whereas the argument's conclusion only establishes relocation as a necessary condition (relocation is the 'only way' to survive). According to the Negation Test, if we assume relocation will NOT guarantee survival, the conclusion that it is the 'only way' to survive remains perfectly intact. Therefore, the argument does not logically depend on this assumption.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's core conclusion.
Conclusion: The only way to prevent the extinction of the Copiapoa in the wild is to artificially relocate the remaining populations to higher elevations.
Isolating the exact logical force of the conclusion is required to determine what the argument relies upon.
2
Analyze the logical parameters of the conclusion.
The phrase 'the only way' establishes relocation as a necessary condition for preventing extinction. It does not establish it as a sufficient condition.
Understanding the difference between necessary and sufficient conditions is critical for evaluating high-level LSAT assumptions.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the proposed assumption in the statement.
Negated assumption: Artificially relocating the populations to higher elevations will NOT successfully prevent their extinction.
A necessary assumption must destroy the core argument when logically negated.
4
Evaluate the impact of the negated assumption on the conclusion.
The negated assumption does not invalidate the conclusion. Relocation can still logically be the 'only way' to prevent extinction, even if it ultimately proves insufficient to save the species.
If negating an assumption leaves the conclusion logically intact, the assumption is not strictly necessary for the argument.

Key Concept

Distinguishing between necessary and sufficient conditions when identifying unstated premises (Negation Test).
Rate this question