PrepTest 156, Section 4, Question 11
A law is futile unless most of the(34 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(7 more words not shown)
- AA comprehensive solution(12 more words not shown)
- BSome nations would(24 more words not shown)
- CIf most nations(19 more words not shown)
- DThe problems created(21 more words not shown)
- EMost of the(20 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Who said a law is the only way to solve pollution?
The opening tells us when a law will be futile: unless most of the parties it governs willingly comply. Then the argument leaps to the claim that no comprehensive international solution is possible, because few nations would willingly surrender power over their industries.
My first objection is that a solution might not depend on that kind of law. What if new technology solved the problem without requiring governments to accept new legal restrictions? We haven't been told that every possible solution has to take the route the author considers.
What we’re looking for
For a required assumption, I'd look for a missing connection between solving pollution and the obstacle the author identifies. The argument needs more than a rule about laws followed by a declaration that no solution is possible. It needs a reason that a solution cannot avoid the difficulty.
Working the answers
- A
This resembles the thought that a solution would require law, but 'major changes' goes further. Even if a solution required legal action, it might operate through existing law or relatively small changes. The argument doesn't need the claim that the changes must be major. A necessary assumption cannot demand more than the reasoning needs.
- BCorrect
This identifies another missing connection: why would solving pollution require nations to give up power over their industries at all? If a comprehensive solution required no such surrender, their reluctance to surrender power wouldn't block that solution.
The argument therefore needs at least some loss of national control to be part of any comprehensive solution. B supplies that required connection. It doesn't by itself repair every gap or prove that reluctant nations make success impossible; the question asks what the argument depends on.
- C
Willingness to obey the law could remove one obstacle without solving the whole problem. For example, nations might cooperate but still lack a workable way to eliminate the pollution. The argument treats unwillingness as an obstacle; it doesn't need to promise that willingness alone would make a comprehensive solution possible.
- D
We don't need this distribution of pollution and its effects. The argument could make the same claim about unwilling governments whether pollution came from a few nations or many. Don't import outside beliefs about which countries produce pollution; the required connection concerns cooperation and control over industry.
- E
The argument doesn't depend on what most current pollution laws require. Its concern is whether a comprehensive solution can be achieved given nations' unwillingness to surrender power. Existing laws could have various requirements without resolving that missing connection.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.