VIPLSATCracking LSAT makes you a VIP.

Logical Reasoning · Necessary Assumption

PrepTest 104 · Section 1 · Question 21

Phase 1 (your first ~400 questions): read the guidance, then answer. No clock.

Step 1 · Pre-Question Guidance · read this first

Question type
Necessary Assumption
The one idea it tests
If a plan only works when a tool is spread widely, the argument needs the tool to actually reach the wide group.
The basic logic
Find the top bun: the tool should be exempt from the cutoff. Find the patty: when the tool is widely available, the bad situation cannot last. The gap: will this tool really end up spread widely, or could a few people grab it all? Pull the plank on each choice: if the tool would end up in only a few hands, does the argument fall?
Tiny words that decide it
  • “widely”
  • “impossible”
  • “depends”

Playground logic

Nadia says cleaning wipes should still go to the messy art club, because no room stays messy when everyone has wipes. Her secret sauce: the wipes will reach everyone. If the club president locks them in her drawer, the plan collapses.

Step 2 · The kid story

The Wipe Exemption

The art room was a disaster: paint on the chairs, glue on the floor, glitter on the ceiling somehow. Ms. Rivera decided to stop sending any new supplies to the art club until they cleaned up. No paper, no paint, nothing. Nadia raised her hand. "Please keep sending the cleaning wipes. A room cannot stay messy when every kid has wipes in their hands." Marcus nodded. "Airtight!" Priya sipped her juice box. "One question. Who gets the box of wipes?" Lulu checked her clipboard. "Last time, the club president kept every supply in her desk drawer." Nadia's face fell. Her argument only works if the wipes actually reach every kid. If the president hoards them, the room stays messy, wipes or no wipes. Tommy offered to hand out the wipes himself, in exchange for candy.

Step 3 · Try the model question

Ms. Rivera plans to stop all supplies to the art club until its room is clean. Nadia argues that cleaning wipes should be the exception, since a room cannot stay messy when wipes are in every kid's hands.

Nadia's argument needs which of these to be true?

Choices

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Case of the Lighthouse Lamps

A harbor town banned all deliveries to a shipping firm that kept crashing boats. A lamp maker asked the judge to allow her lamps through. "No harbor stays dangerous when bright lamps are everywhere along the shore." Mr. Whitfield, for the town, stood up. "Where will these lamps go?" He called the firm's bookkeeper, who admitted, "The owner keeps all new equipment on his private dock." Mr. Whitfield faced the judge. "The lamp maker's whole argument rests on the lamps being spread along the shore. If they sit on one man's dock, the shore stays dark and the boats keep crashing." The judge agreed: the request depended on something nobody had shown.

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 104, Section 1, Question 21 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Name the conclusion: one item should be exempt. Name the reason: when that item is widely available, the bad condition cannot last. Ask what must happen for the reason to apply here. Then pull the plank on each choice: negate it and see whether the reason stops reaching the conclusion. The right choice closes the gap between sending the item and the item being widely available. Ignore choices that are stronger than needed or about other people's opinions.