Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT123 S3 Q9 Explanation

Naturalist: The recent claims that

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsNecessary Assumption

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Naturalist: The recent claims that the Tasmanian tiger is not extinct are false. The Tasmanian tiger’s natural habitat was taken over by sheep farming decades ago, resulting in the animal’s systematic elimination from the area. Since then naturalists working in the region have discovered no hard evidence of its survival, sightings of the animal, the Tasmanian tiger no longer exists.

What this question is testing

Necessary Assumption

Your task

Find the assumption the argument requires in order for its conclusion to hold.

Common trap

Answers that would help the argument but aren't strictly required (sufficient, not necessary).

Winning move

Negate each choice — the right one breaks the argument when negated.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
9.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the naturalist’s

Answer choices

  1. Too Strong5% picked this

    Sheep farming drove the last Tasmanian tigers to starvation by chasing them from

    Sheep farming played a role in the tiger’s disappearance, but to specifically assert that it drove the tiger’s to starvation is more precise than the argument needs to assume.

  2. Weakens2% picked this

    Some scavengers in Tasmania are capable of destroying tiger carcasses without

    This weakens the argument by providing an alternative explanation for why the naturalists have not found hard evidence of the tiger’s survival.

  3. Too Strong6% picked this

    Every naturalist working in the Tasmanian tiger’s natural habitat has looked systematically for evidence of

    The argument does not need to assume that every naturalist working in the Tasmanian tiger’s natural habitat has looked for the tiger.

  4. Correct83% picked this

    The Tasmanian tiger did not move and adapt to a different region in response to

    Why this is right

    This defends the argument from a possibility that would undermine the argument’s assumption.

    Skill tested: Necessary Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Too Strong4% picked this

    Those who have reported sightings of the Tasmanian tiger are not

    While this weakens the opposing point, it is not necessary for the argument to be valid.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free