PrepTest 128, Section 3, Question 22
Critic: Historians purport to discover the patterns inherent(48 more words not shown)
The critic's argument depends on(6 more words not shown)
- AHistorians have many(6 more words not shown)
- BThere is no(23 more words not shown)
- CHistorians presuppose that(8 more words not shown)
- DMost historians cannot(11 more words not shown)
- EWhich pattern a(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The critic says historians impose patterns by deciding which events to include and which to leave out. I can see how a historian's perspective might enter a narrative that way. The critic then goes further: histories reveal more about historians' presuppositions than about the actual events.
That comparison makes me pause. Even if a historian's perspective affects a narrative, why assume it tells us more about that perspective than about history? Imagine an account that is mostly factual reporting, with a small amount shaped by bias—say, 90 percent and 10 percent. Those aren't measured quantities here; the example just shows why admitting some influence doesn't settle which kind of information predominates.
What we’re looking for
Now we're asked for a required assumption. My concern is that comparative leap, but we need a statement the argument depends on, not necessarily one that repairs every weakness. I'll look for a connection that must hold for the critic's explanation of historical narratives to work.
Working the answers
- A
Historians could have different presuppositions, and their respective narratives could reveal those different views. The argument doesn't require them to share many assumptions with one another.
- B
We could have a way to check whether a particular pattern is present in the events and still find that a historian's chosen narrative reveals the historian's assumptions. The critic's claim doesn't require certainty about historical patterns to be impossible.
- C
The argument doesn't need historians to apply a pattern across many eras. A historian could approach one period with presuppositions that shape the narrative of that period alone. C adds a requirement about the reach of those patterns.
- D
A historian could recognize an assumption and still allow it to influence the account. The argument doesn't require most historians to be incapable of becoming aware of what they bring to their narratives.
- ECorrect
Here is a connection I had initially filled in for the critic: the imposed pattern must be affected by the historian's presuppositions. The premise describes selecting events and imposing a pattern; the conclusion says the result reveals underlying assumptions.
If the choice of pattern had nothing to do with those assumptions, the act of imposing it wouldn't provide the proposed basis for learning about them. E connects the imposed pattern to what the critic says it reveals. It doesn't settle my earlier question about “more,” but a required assumption needn't fix every gap by itself.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.