Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT127 S3 Q18 Explanation

Fund-raiser: A charitable organization

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

Start practicing free

Free to start

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

Fund-raiser: A charitable organization rarely gives its donors the right to vote on its policies. The inability to directly influence how charities spend contributions makes potential donors feel less of an emotional connection to the charity. Thus, most charities could probably increase donations by giving donors the right to vote.

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
18.

Which one of the following is an assumption that the fund-raiser's argument

Answer choices

  1. Too Strong3% picked this

    The most effective way for a charity to give potential donors the ability to directly influence what that charity does is by giving donors

    The argument does assume voting gives potential donors the ability to directly influence what that charity does. But it does not assume that voting is the most effective way to do so.

  2. Reversal9% picked this

    Most charities that have increased the amount of money they raise through donations have done so by making potential donors feel a

    This reverses the causal RM -most→ EC relationship assumed by the argument.

  3. Supports a Premise4% picked this

    Every charity that has given donors the right to vote on its policies has seen a marked increase in the emotional connection

    This supports the second premise in the argument.

  4. Too Strong2% picked this

    Most potential donors to a charity are unwilling to give that charity any money if there is no possible way for them to have

    While this supports the conclusion directly, it is stronger than what the argument necessarily assumes to be true. The argument would still hold if it were merely some potential donors to a charity are unwilling to give that charity any money if there is no possible way for them to have any influence on that charity’s policies.

  5. Correct81% picked this

    The emotional connection potential donors feel to a charity can affect the amount of money that

    Why this is right

    This bridges the gap in the EC -causes→ RM causal chain between the emotional connection felt by a donor and the amount of money the charity can raise.

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

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

Save and practice this skill
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