Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT128 S3 Q22 Explanation

Critic: Historians purport to discover

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

Critic: Historians purport to discover the patterns inherent in the course of events. But historians actually impose, rather than find, such patterns by choosing what to include in and exclude from their historical narratives. Thus, properly understood, histories reveal more about understand what happened than about what actually happened.

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
22.

The critic's argument depends on which one of the

Answer choices

  1. Irrelevant Comparison2% picked this

    Historians have many presuppositions in common with

    It doesn't matter whether historians have the same presuppositions or different ones. All the author/argument cares about is that a given historian's presuppositions get reflected by what the historian has chosen to include/exclude and thereby what pattern they have imposed.

  2. Too Strong (no way)13% picked this

    There is no way to determine with certainty whether a pattern described by a historian is actually present in and not

    This may seem like an inference we could take away from the premise (Hey, if historians are imposing patterns, then they're all arbitrary and no one knows whether the pattern is real or not). But it's too strong and has nothing to do with the reasoning move to the conclusion. 1st: we aren't in the business of trying to figure out what can be inferred from a premise. If that's why we're liking an answer on NA, we want to remind ourselves that we're looking at the wrong place. Our answer should deal with the move to the conclusion, not just with a premise. 2nd: negating this doesn't hurt the argument. If there is a way to determine with certainty whether a historian's imposed pattern is actually present, that doesn't hurt the author. The author could happily accept that there are ways with certainty to know that a historian's imposed pattern is not actually present.

  3. Out of Scope (many different eras)3% picked this

    Historians presuppose that certain historical patterns accurately describe many

    There's no reason the author needs to think that the patterns historians impose apply to many different eras. If the patterns they impose supposedly apply to only a few eras, that doesn't hurt the argument in any way.

  4. Irrelevant Quality5% picked this

    Most historians cannot become aware of the presuppositions that they bring

    The word "most" is super sketchy in NA. Who cares if 51% vs. 49% of historians can become aware of their own assumptions? All the author cares about are whether those assumptions are reflected in the patterns historians impose via including/excluding certain things. "Awareness" wouldn't be relevant unless we were saying that historians could become aware of their assumptions and make sure not to let those assumptions affect the way they choose what to include/exclude.

  5. Correct77% picked this

    Which pattern a historian imposes upon events is affected by that

    Why this is right

    This provides a missing link between what we were told historians do (they impose patterns on events) and what the conclusion is telling us histories reveal (the historian's presuppositions).

    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.

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