PrepTest 110, Section 3, Question 5
Columnist: A democratic society cannot exist unless its(49 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AAnyone who relies(20 more words not shown)
- BCivic organizations cannot(8 more words not shown)
- CNewspapers and other(10 more words not shown)
- DRelying on movies(17 more words not shown)
- EPeople who rely(19 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
What do movies have to do with any of that?
The first two statements give us a chain of requirements. A democracy needs strong bonds of mutual trust. Building and strengthening those bonds requires participation in groups outside the family. So the columnist has given us a reason democracy needs that participation.
Notice what hasn't been established: trust alone doesn't guarantee democracy. People might trust each other and still live under a tyrant. We're being told what democracy needs, not that meeting one requirement automatically creates a democracy.
Then movies and electronic entertainment arrive in the conclusion. The columnist says relying on them damages democracy, but hasn't connected them to either trust or group participation. Maybe the idea is that people stay home watching movies instead of going to meetings. That would make the connection understandable. So far, though, it's an unstated possibility.
What we’re looking for
For the necessary assumption, look for that missing connection. Entertainment must interfere with something democracy needs. The answer might connect it to the bonds themselves or to the participation that builds them.
Working the answers
- A
This goes much further than the argument needs. It says anyone who relies on this entertainment is unable to form a strong bond of mutual trust with a citizen. The columnist only concludes that widespread reliance has a damaging effect on democracy.
Some people could keep forming strong bonds while the overall trend weakened participation and trust. That would still fit the columnist's concern. A would give the author powerful support, but the argument doesn't depend on this absolute ban on forming bonds.
- B
A civic organization could use electronic media to recruit members or publicize a meeting. That wouldn't settle what happens when people rely on it for entertainment. The author doesn't need electronic media to be useless for every purpose; the concern is its effect on the participation and trust democracy requires.
- C
We don't need to establish that print media is good for democracy. Reading a newspaper might help civic involvement or keep someone occupied at home; the argument doesn't say. Its conclusion concerns movies and electronic entertainment, so a claim about newspapers doesn't connect that entertainment to the alleged harm.
- DCorrect
Here is the missing link: relying on this entertainment generally reduces participation in groups outside the family. Those groups are where, according to the premises, the necessary bonds of trust are formed and strengthened. Making people less likely to participate therefore gives the author a way to explain damage to something democracy needs.
This is also appropriately limited. D doesn't say nobody ever attends a meeting again or that every person loses the ability to trust. A general reduction is enough to fit a claim about a corrosive effect.
- E
Being closer to one's family isn't required by this argument. Someone could spend hours watching movies alone and become less involved with both family and outside groups. The author needs a connection to reduced outside participation or trust, not increased closeness at home.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.