Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions

30 questions

Question 21Question →

Sociologist: A functioning democracy requires its electorate to have access to impartial political reporting. Over the last decade, however, the media landscape has been entirely consolidated by three massive entertainment conglomerates. Because these conglomerates are legally bound to prioritize maximizing their quarterly profits above all other objectives, the fundamental prerequisites for a functioning democracy are presently being undermined.

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

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Prioritizing the maximization of quarterly profits above all other objectives is incompatible with providing impartial political reporting.

Answer

The assumption that prioritizing the maximization of quarterly profits above all other objectives is incompatible with providing impartial political reporting.
This statement perfectly bridges the gap in the author's reasoning. The author concludes that the prerequisite for democracy (impartial reporting) is undermined because media conglomerates prioritize quarterly profits above all else. For this conclusion to be valid, there must be a fundamental conflict between prioritizing profits and providing impartial reporting. If we apply the Negation Test and assume that maximizing profits is NOT incompatible with providing impartial political reporting, the entire argument collapses.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that the fundamental prerequisites for a functioning democracy are presently being undermined.
Locating the main conclusion is essential for determining what the premises are attempting to prove.
2
Identify the premises and the fundamental prerequisite mentioned.
The prerequisite is 'access to impartial political reporting.' The active premises are that media is controlled by conglomerates, and these conglomerates prioritize maximizing quarterly profits above all other objectives.
Isolating the premises reveals the evidence the author uses to reach the conclusion.
3
Find the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The argument jumps from 'prioritizing quarterly profits' to 'the prerequisite (impartial reporting) is undermined.' There is no stated connection between profit prioritization and a lack of impartial reporting.
A supporter assumption must explicitly connect the rogue elements in the premises to the rogue elements in the conclusion.
4
Formulate the necessary bridging assumption.
The argument requires the assumption that prioritizing profits prevents or is incompatible with providing impartial political reporting.
Applying the Negation Test confirms this: if maximizing profits were perfectly compatible with impartial reporting, the conclusion would no longer follow.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Question 22Question →

Match each logical argument on the left with the necessary supporter assumption on the right that correctly bridges the gap between its premise and its conclusion.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

According to classical utilitarianism, only policies that maximize aggregate happiness are considered morally justified. Therefore, the recently proposed healthcare legislation is not morally justified.
Avian species that build their nests exclusively on the ground are highly susceptible to predation by invasive mammals. Thus, the indigenous ground-weaver bird is highly susceptible to such predation.
A startup company cannot secure Series B funding unless it has demonstrated consistent month-over-month user growth for a year. It follows that NovaTech will not secure Series B funding this quarter.
Only artifacts forged before the Bronze Age collapse can accurately be classified as true Minoan relics. Consequently, the newly discovered copper shield cannot be classified as a true Minoan relic.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The utilitarian argument pairs with the legislation failing to maximize happiness. The avian argument pairs with the ground-weaver bird nesting on the ground. The startup argument pairs with NovaTech lacking consistent growth. The artifact argument pairs with the shield not being forged before the collapse.
Each correct match successfully bridges the logical gap between the argument's premises and its conclusion. By formally linking the 'rogue' subject introduced in the conclusion to the conditional rules provided in the premises, the assumptions validate the inferences (often by satisfying the sufficient condition or triggering the contrapositive).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the formal logic of each argument's premise to identify sufficient and necessary conditions.
Identified conditional rules such as 'Morally Justified → Maximizes Happiness' and 'Nests on Ground → Susceptible to Predation'.
Supporter assumptions often rely on completing conditional chains or triggering contrapositives.
2
Examine the conclusion of each argument to determine what new element has been introduced.
Identified specific subjects in the conclusions: 'healthcare legislation', 'ground-weaver bird', 'NovaTech', and 'copper shield'.
The new subject in the conclusion must be explicitly linked to the rule established in the premise.
3
Formulate the missing link (supporter assumption) that legally connects the new subject to the established conditional rule.
Generated the required bridging statements to validate the argument.
This guarantees the truth of the conclusion based on the premise.
4
Match each logically generated assumption to the corresponding statement on the right.
Successfully paired each argument with its required supporter assumption.
Finalizes the matching process.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions in Formal Logic
Question 23Question →

Transportation Planner: Any infrastructure project that expands highway capacity inevitably encourages urban sprawl. The newly approved North Corridor expansion will add two additional lanes to the existing highway. Therefore, the North Corridor expansion will undoubtedly result in increased carbon emissions for the region.

Which of the following are assumptions upon which the transportation planner's argument depends? Select all that apply.

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Adding two additional lanes to an existing highway expands highway capacity.; Encouraging urban sprawl results in increased carbon emissions for the region.

Answer

The argument requires assuming both that adding lanes constitutes expanding highway capacity, and that encouraging urban sprawl leads to increased carbon emissions.
The correct choices bridge the two distinct logical gaps in the argument. First, the argument jumps from the North Corridor 'adding two additional lanes' to the premise about 'expanding highway capacity'. Second, it jumps from the consequence of 'encouraging urban sprawl' to the conclusion of 'increased carbon emissions'. Both connections are strictly necessary for the argument's conclusion to validly follow from its premises.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the argument's premises and conclusion.
Premise 1: Expanding highway capacity leads to urban sprawl. Premise 2: The North Corridor expansion adds two lanes. Conclusion: The North Corridor expansion will increase carbon emissions.
Identifying the structural components of the argument is the first step in finding logical gaps.
2
Identify the conceptual gaps between the premises and the conclusion.
Gap 1 is between 'adding two lanes' and 'expanding highway capacity'. Gap 2 is between 'encouraging urban sprawl' and 'increased carbon emissions'.
Supporter assumptions are unstated premises that connect the rogue elements of the argument together.
3
Formulate the required supporter assumptions to bridge these gaps.
Assumption 1: Adding two lanes expands highway capacity. Assumption 2: Encouraging urban sprawl leads to increased carbon emissions.
Without these logical bridges, the conclusion cannot be validly drawn from the given premises.
4
Apply the Negation Test to verify necessity.
If adding lanes does not expand capacity, or if urban sprawl does not increase emissions, the logical chain breaks and the argument collapses.
A necessary assumption must destroy the argument's validity when negated.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Question 24Question →

Philosopher: An individual can be held morally blameworthy for an outcome only if the actions leading to that outcome were the product of conscious deliberation. Neurological studies demonstrate that the physical movements involved in routine driving are initiated by the brain milliseconds before the driver becomes consciously aware of the intention to perform them. Therefore, drivers cannot be held morally blameworthy for traffic accidents caused by their physical movements during routine driving.

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

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Physical movements initiated before an individual is consciously aware of the intention to perform them are not the product of conscious deliberation.

Answer

The assumption on which the argument depends is that physical movements initiated before an individual is consciously aware of the intention to perform them are not the product of conscious deliberation.
The argument concludes that drivers are not morally blameworthy for routine driving accidents because those physical movements are initiated before conscious awareness. Since the stated requirement for blameworthiness is that actions must be the product of 'conscious deliberation', the argument logically requires a bridge stating that movements initiated prior to conscious awareness do not involve conscious deliberation. The correct option perfectly provides this bridge.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the core structure of the argument and identify the main conclusion.
The conclusion is that drivers cannot be held morally blameworthy for accidents caused by physical movements during routine driving.
Understanding the exact scope of the conclusion is the first step in identifying missing links.
2
Identify the premises supporting this conclusion.
Premise 1 establishes a necessary condition: moral blameworthiness requires actions to be the product of conscious deliberation. Premise 2 states a fact: routine driving movements are initiated before the driver is consciously aware of the intention to perform them.
Breaking down the evidence reveals the specific concepts the author is attempting to connect.
3
Spot the conceptual gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The argument jumps from movements being 'initiated before conscious awareness' (Premise 2) to concluding they lack the 'conscious deliberation' required for blameworthiness (Premise 1).
A Supporter Assumption must directly bridge new terminology in the premise to new terminology in the conclusion.
4
Apply the Negation Test to verify the required assumption.
Negating the correct statement yields: 'Movements initiated before conscious awareness ARE the product of conscious deliberation.' If true, the fact that routine driving movements occur this way no longer disqualifies them from moral blameworthiness, destroying the conclusion.
The Negation Test definitively proves whether an assumption is logically necessary for the argument to survive.

Key Concept

Identifying missing links between premises and conclusions in formal logic arguments.
Question 25Question →

Match each logical stimulus argument (left) with the specific supporter assumption (right) required to bridge the logical gap between its premise and conclusion.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

The newly excavated artifacts at the Oakhaven site contain elevated levels of isotopic strontium. Therefore, the individuals buried there were not born in the local region.
The central bank has prioritized stabilizing currency valuation over stimulating job growth. Consequently, the country's manufacturing sector will continue to contract.
The Alpine Marmot population has started hibernating three weeks later than historical averages. This indicates that the region's overall snowpack volume has significantly decreased.
Professor Vance publicly disclosed confidential corporate misconduct out of a desire for personal fame. Therefore, her whistleblowing action lacked moral justification.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The correct pairings connect each argument's specific premise to its novel conclusion: the archaeology argument pairs with the assumption about native individuals and strontium; the economics argument pairs with the job stimulation assumption; the biology argument pairs with the marmot hibernation assumption; and the ethics argument pairs with the assumption about personal recognition.
Each correct assumption functions as a deductive bridge. By connecting the disconnected terminology in the premise to the novel terminology introduced in the conclusion, the assumption closes the logical gap and allows the argument's inference to be validly drawn.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze each stimulus to identify the premise and the conclusion.
Isolated the evidence provided and the final claim made for each argument.
Understanding the structure of the argument is necessary to spot the logical gap.
2
Identify the 'rogue' terms in each argument's conclusion.
Found new concepts in the conclusions (e.g., 'moral justification', 'not born in the local region') that did not appear in the premises.
Supporter assumptions must bridge the logical gap by connecting these rogue terms back to the premise evidence.
3
Match the rogue terms to the assumptions that logically connect them to the premises using formal conditional logic.
Successfully paired each argument with the assumption that guarantees the conclusion when added to the premise.
This validates the argument, fulfilling the definition of a necessary and sufficient supporter assumption.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 26Question →

City Engineer: The newly implemented smart-grid electrical system dynamically routes power based on neighborhood-level real-time consumption data. By doing so, the system effectively minimizes the occurrence of localized power surges during peak usage hours. Therefore, the implementation of this smart-grid system will undoubtedly extend the average lifespan of household appliances across the city.

The city engineer's argument relies on assuming which one of the following?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Localized power surges have a negative effect on the average lifespan of household appliances.

Answer

The correct answer is the statement indicating that localized power surges have a negative effect on the average lifespan of household appliances.
The argument jumps from the premise that the new system 'minimizes localized power surges' to the conclusion that it will 'extend the average lifespan of household appliances.' For this conclusion to logically follow, there must be a definitive relationship between power surges and appliance lifespans. The correct option bridges this gap by establishing that power surges negatively affect the lifespan of appliances. If we apply the Negation Test and assume that power surges do NOT negatively affect appliance lifespans, then minimizing those surges would have absolutely no impact on extending lifespans, causing the engineer's argument to collapse.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the premises provided in the stimulus.
Premises: The smart-grid dynamically routes power based on consumption data, which minimizes the occurrence of localized power surges.
Deconstructing the argument structure is the first step in identifying the logical gap.
2
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
Conclusion: The smart-grid system will extend the average lifespan of household appliances.
The conclusion introduces new concepts that must be supported by the premises.
3
Locate the 'rogue' or new element in the conclusion that was not mentioned in the premises.
The new element is 'extending the average lifespan of household appliances'.
An assumption must bridge the gap between the premise concepts and the new conclusion concept.
4
Formulate the missing link (supporter assumption) that connects the premise to the conclusion.
The missing link is that minimizing localized power surges (the premise result) leads to extending appliance lifespans (the conclusion).
Without this connection, the premise provides no logical support for the conclusion.
5
Apply the Negation Test to verify the correct option.
Negating the correct statement yields: 'Localized power surges do NOT have a negative effect on appliance lifespans.' If this were true, minimizing surges would not extend lifespans, destroying the argument.
A necessary assumption must destroy the argument when negated.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions require connecting a concept introduced only in the conclusion with a concept discussed in the premises.
Question 27Question →

Nutritional Biochemist: The recently synthesized compound 'Z-Sweet' binds perfectly to the tongue's sweet-taste receptors but is entirely indigestible by human metabolic enzymes. Furthermore, longitudinal studies confirm that ingesting Z-Sweet fails to trigger the release of pancreatic insulin. Consequently, substituting dietary sugar with Z-Sweet will guarantee a reduction in overall body adiposity while permanently eliminating neurochemical sugar addiction.

Based on the biochemist's reasoning, which of the following statements act as required supporter assumptions that logically bridge gaps in the argument? Select all that apply.

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The stimulation of sweet-taste receptors by a substance that fails to trigger pancreatic insulin release leads to the elimination of neurochemical sugar addiction.; Substituting dietary sugar with an entirely indigestible substance ensures a reduction in overall body adiposity.

Answer

The correct assumptions are that stimulating sweet-taste receptors without an insulin response eliminates sugar addiction, and that substituting sugar with an indigestible substance ensures a reduction in adiposity.
The biochemist's argument contains a classic logical leap: it introduces two completely new concepts in the conclusion ('a reduction in overall body adiposity' and 'eliminating neurochemical sugar addiction') that were never mentioned in the evidence. For the conclusion to logically follow, there must be unstated assumptions linking the premise facts (indigestibility, sweet-taste receptor binding, and a lack of insulin) directly to these new outcomes. The two correct statements successfully bridge these distinct conceptual gaps, validating the conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the premises to establish the provided evidence.
Z-Sweet binds to receptors, is entirely indigestible, and does not trigger insulin release.
Identifying the foundation of the argument is the first step in finding the logical gap.
2
Analyze the conclusion to identify any 'rogue' or new elements.
The conclusion claims two outcomes: 'a reduction in overall body adiposity' and 'eliminating neurochemical sugar addiction.'
Supporter assumptions are required whenever a conclusion introduces new concepts not explicitly covered by the premises.
3
Formulate the missing links (the Supporter assumptions).
The argument requires a link connecting indigestibility to reduced adiposity, and a link connecting receptor-binding/lack of insulin to eliminating addiction.
The conclusion can only be valid if the evidence logically guarantees these specific new outcomes.
4
Evaluate the answer choices against the formulated missing links.
Two options explicitly provide these exact conceptual bridges without illegally reversing the conditional logic.
Because the prompt requires selecting all valid supporter assumptions, both distinct conceptual gaps must be addressed by the correct selections.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Question 28Question →

Art conservator: Traditional chemical solvents used to clean Renaissance oil paintings often seep through the protective varnish and interact directly with the underlying paint pigments. A new cleaning technique, thermal plasma descaling, exclusively removes the outer layer of grime without penetrating the varnish at all. Thus, museums can be assured that employing thermal plasma descaling will never alter the original color balance of these Renaissance paintings.

The art conservator's argument depends on which one of the following assumptions?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The original color balance of a Renaissance oil painting cannot be altered by a cleaning technique unless that technique penetrates the painting's protective varnish.

Answer

The original color balance of a Renaissance oil painting cannot be altered by a cleaning technique unless that technique penetrates the painting's protective varnish.
This statement provides the necessary logical bridge between the premises and the conclusion. The author argues that because thermal plasma descaling does not penetrate the varnish, it will not alter the color balance. For this logic to hold, the author must assume that penetrating the varnish is a strict requirement for altering the color balance. If we apply the Negation Test—assuming that a painting's color balance CAN be altered by a technique that FAILS to penetrate the varnish—the conservator's entire argument falls apart.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that employing thermal plasma descaling will never alter the original color balance of Renaissance paintings.
Locating the main conclusion is essential for determining what the author is ultimately trying to prove.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
The core premise is that thermal plasma descaling removes grime without penetrating the varnish at all.
Premises provide the stated evidence. The gap will exist between this evidence and the conclusion.
3
Spot the conceptual gap (new elements) in the conclusion.
The premise discusses 'penetrating the varnish', but the conclusion makes a leap to a new concept: 'altering the original color balance'.
In a Supporter Assumption question, the correct answer must explicitly bridge the new concept in the conclusion back to the concepts in the premises.
4
Formulate the required logical bridge.
The argument requires a rule stating that if a technique does not penetrate the varnish, it will not alter the color balance.
Without this rule, it remains entirely possible that thermal plasma descaling alters the color balance through some other mechanism (like heat) without ever penetrating the varnish.
5
Apply the Negation Test to the correct choice to verify it is necessary.
Negating the correct statement yields: 'The color balance CAN be altered even if a technique DOES NOT penetrate the varnish.' This destroys the author's conclusion.
The Negation Test is the definitive proof that an assumption is logically necessary for the argument.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Question 29Question →

Sociologist: Only societies that possess a formalized system of property rights are capable of developing a complex market economy. Nomadic cultures inherently lack a formalized system of property rights, as their traditional lifestyle prevents them from claiming permanent ownership of specific land tracts. Therefore, it is impossible for nomadic cultures to cultivate highly specialized artisan classes.

The sociologist's argument relies on assuming which one of the following?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The cultivation of highly specialized artisan classes requires a complex market economy.

Answer

The cultivation of highly specialized artisan classes requires a complex market economy.
The argument's premises establish a chain: nomadic cultures lack property rights, and without property rights, there can be no complex market economy. The conclusion then states that nomadic cultures cannot have highly specialized artisan classes. For this conclusion to logically follow, there must be a rule connecting the lack of a market economy to the lack of artisans. The correct answer provides this exact bridge by establishing that a complex market economy is a necessary prerequisite for cultivating highly specialized artisan classes. Applying the Negation Test confirms this: if artisan classes do NOT require a complex market economy, the fact that nomads lack such an economy is irrelevant, and the conclusion collapses.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core premises and the logical chain they create.
The premises establish that nomadic cultures lack formalized property rights, and without property rights, a society cannot develop a complex market economy.
Understanding the established facts is required before finding the gap in the reasoning.
2
Identify the main conclusion.
The conclusion claims that nomadic cultures cannot cultivate highly specialized artisan classes.
The conclusion introduces the target concept that must be proven by the premises.
3
Spot the 'rogue' element (the conceptual gap) between the premises and the conclusion.
The premises prove nomads lack a 'complex market economy', but the conclusion suddenly makes a claim about lacking 'highly specialized artisan classes'.
A valid logical deduction requires all terms in the conclusion to be firmly supported by the premises.
4
Formulate the necessary bridging assumption (the Supporter).
We must connect the absence of a market economy to the absence of artisans. Thus, we must assume that having artisans requires having a market economy.
Connecting the rogue conclusion element to the established premise chain logically completes the argument.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Question 30Question →

Historian: Any society that maintains a standing professional army must divert a substantial portion of its agricultural surplus to the state. However, diverting a substantial portion of agricultural surplus to the state inevitably suppresses the development of an independent merchant class. Therefore, if an ancient society featured a flourishing independent merchant class, it must not have possessed heavily fortified urban centers.

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

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Any society that possesses heavily fortified urban centers also maintains a standing professional army.

Answer

The argument depends on the assumption that any society that possesses heavily fortified urban centers also maintains a standing professional army.
The historian establishes a logical chain: maintaining a standing army leads to diverting surplus, which in turn suppresses an independent merchant class. By contrapositive, if a society has a flourishing independent merchant class, it must NOT have a standing professional army. However, the historian's conclusion jumps to stating that such a society must not have 'heavily fortified urban centers.' For this conclusion to logically follow from the fact that they lack a standing army, the argument must assume a connection between the two: specifically, that having heavily fortified urban centers requires having a standing professional army. If we negate this correct statement ('A society can possess heavily fortified urban centers without maintaining a standing professional army'), the historian's conclusion completely falls apart.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Map the formal logic of the premises.
Premise 1: Standing Army -> Divert Surplus. Premise 2: Divert Surplus -> Suppressed Merchant Class. Chain: Standing Army -> Suppressed Merchant Class.
Tracking the conditional statements reveals what the author has successfully proven so far.
2
Map the formal logic of the conclusion.
Conclusion: Flourishing Merchant Class (Not Suppressed) -> No Heavily Fortified Urban Centers.
This exposes the exact claim the author is trying to make based on the premises.
3
Identify the logical gap (rogue element).
The premises prove that a Flourishing Merchant Class -> No Standing Army (by contrapositive). However, the conclusion claims Flourishing Merchant Class -> No Heavily Fortified Urban Centers.
Finding the mismatch between what is proven and what is concluded isolates the missing link.
4
Formulate the required bridging assumption.
To jump from 'No Standing Army' to 'No Heavily Fortified Urban Centers', the argument must assume: No Standing Army -> No Heavily Fortified Urban Centers. The contrapositive of this is: Heavily Fortified Urban Centers -> Standing Army.
A Supporter Assumption must connect the rogue term in the conclusion back to the framework established in the premises.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions in Formal Logic
PreviousPage 2 / 2
Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions Practice Questions — LSAT — Page 2 | Examkin