PrepTest 119, Section 3, Question 24
Editorialist: Despite the importance it seems to have(68 more words not shown)
The conclusion of the editorialist's(13 more words not shown)
- AAnything that exists(13 more words not shown)
- BOnly if one(13 more words not shown)
- CIn order to(13 more words not shown)
- DIf everyone believes(6 more words not shown)
- EWhatever is true(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Something can depend on people without being nonexistent. The LSAT is a human invention, but that doesn't mean there is no test to take.
The editorialist wants to make a similar jump about money. Suppose we accept that money would disappear if everyone stopped believing in it. Does its dependence on shared belief show that it doesn't exist now, while people do believe in it? That is the missing step. The financial-market example illustrates an effect of people's beliefs; it doesn't supply a definition of what counts as real.
What we’re looking for
I don't have to like this argument to complete it. The question asks for an assumption that makes the conclusion follow. We'd need a rule excluding anything whose existence depends on belief: if stopping the belief would make it disappear, it doesn't really exist in the sense the editorialist means. That is the bridge I'd look for.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
A makes independence from belief a requirement for existence. Anything that exists would keep existing even after everyone stopped believing in it. Money, according to the premise, would not survive that loss of belief. It therefore fails A's requirement and cannot count as something that really exists under this rule.
The answer states the rule by describing what existing things must do, rather than by directly saying money isn't real. Follow the requirement through the facts, and it reaches the conclusion. We needn't endorse that definition outside this argument.
- B
This requires the possibility of mistaken beliefs about something. But we aren't told that people cannot have mistaken beliefs about money. Knowing money depends on belief is different from knowing that beliefs about it cannot be mistaken. B doesn't give us a requirement the evidence shows money fails.
- C
This requires practical consequences. The passage begins by acknowledging money's apparent importance in our lives and then discusses financial-market effects. Nothing establishes that money lacks practical consequences. C therefore supplies no route to concluding that money fails to exist.
- D
This gives a way to establish existence if everyone believes. We need a rule that establishes nonexistence from dependence on belief. D doesn't say that things which would disappear without belief don't exist while the belief remains. It doesn't connect the given premise to the conclusion.
- E
Extending claims about money to financial markets doesn't establish the missing claim about money in the first place. Even if both depend on belief, we'd still need to know why that dependence means they aren't real. E spreads the same unresolved question rather than answering it.
More Sufficient Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Sufficient Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.