Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT6 S3 Q9 Explanation

Until he was dismissed amid

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

Until he was dismissed amid great controversy, Hastings was considered one of the greatest intelligence agents of all time. It is clear that if his dismissal was justified, then Hastings was either incompetent or else disloyal. Soon after the dismissal, however, it was shown that forced to conclude that Hastings must have been disloyal.

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 states an assumption upon which the

Answer choices

  1. Correct79% picked this

    Hastings’s dismissal was

    Why this is right

    This affirms the trigger of the conditional, which then makes the rest of the argument make logical sense. If we negate it, saying his dismissal was not justified, then the author's evidence suddenly becomes irrelevant.

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

  2. Out of Scope: High-ranking0% picked this

    Hastings was a high-ranking intelligence

    Whether he was high or lower ranking doesn't change the logic of the argument. The argument was never discussing the ranking of officers.

  3. Too Strong / Reversal (if anything)7% picked this

    The dismissal of anyone who was disloyal would

    We have a conditional saying Justified --> Disloyal or Incompetent This answer is saying Disloyal --> Justified The author didn't assume this reversal and doesn't need to assume that every single case of a disloyal person being dismissed is justified.

  4. Opposite (if anything)2% picked this

    Anyone whose dismissal was justified was

    The argument names two reasons for justified dismissal (incompetence or disloyalty), so assuming that all justified dismissals equal disloyalty contradicts the evidence given.

  5. Reversal / Negation11% picked this

    If someone was disloyal or incompetent, then his dismissal

    We have a conditional saying Justified --> Disloyal or Incompetent This answer is just giving an illegal reversal of that rule: Disloyal or incompetent --> Justified

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