A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.
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
The result is unacceptable.
rephrase: we can't accept the supercomputer's solution to the math problem.
The process the supercomputer used is so complex that no one can fully comprehend it.
It seems like we're shopping for a Missing Link like, "If we can't fully comprehend the process it used, then we can't accept its solution to the problem.
Bart’s argument requires which one of the following assumptions?
The mathematical result in question
The argument wasn't saying that the solution is unacceptable simply because a supercomputer did it; it was more specifically "it's unacceptable because we can't fully comprehend the process the supercomputer used". The author might think that a result from a supercomputer can be acceptable, so long as we can understand the process it used.
2% picked this
For the mathematical result in
Why this is right
This gives us the Missing Link in contrapositive form. We wanted, "if no one can comprehend the process, then result isn't acceptable". By contrapositive, "For the result to be acceptable, it's required that at least someone can comprehend the process". Required things always go on the right, so this answer is saying: Result acceptable → someone can fully comprehend process
Skill tested: Necessary Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
90% picked this
To be acceptable, the mathematical
The argument wasn't saying that the solution is unacceptable because it hasn't been replicated on another supercomputer. They said it was it was unacceptable because we can't fully comprehend the process the supercomputer used. The author might think that a result from just one supercomputer can be acceptable, so long as we can understand the process it used.
3% picked this
Making the mathematical result in
It's way too strong to say that any reduction in complexity guarantees that the solution would be accepted. Perhaps the current level of complexity is five million lines of code. If it were only four million lines of code, it would be less complex, but does that guarantee that now people could fully comprehend it? This answer is essentially trying to do an illegal negation of the argument core. The actual argument was sort of like Too complex to fully comprehend → Not Acceptable And this answer is saying, Less complex → Is Acceptable
2% picked this
The supercomputer cannot derive an
This argument is only saying that in this case the result was unacceptable, because the process was so complex that no one can fully comprehend it. The author hasn't shut the door on the possibility that the supercomputer could use a different process that someone could fully comprehend, so it's still possible for the supercomputer to get an acceptable solution.
2% picked this
Continue the review in LSAT Lab
Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.
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.