VIPLSATCracking LSAT makes you a VIP.

Logical Reasoning · Necessary Assumption

PrepTest 129 · Section 2 · Question 24

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
To say meaning is more than intent, the argument needs what a reader sees to count as included in the meaning.
The basic logic
Premises: a reader sometimes sees two clashing ideas in a great work, and the maker never intends clashing ideas. Top bun: meaning is not just intent. The plank under it is that what a reader believes is in the work is included in its meaning. Pull that plank and the argument falls.
Tiny words that decide it
  • “sometimes”
  • “no one”
  • “so”
  • “if”

Playground logic

Kevin's friends sometimes read his great treasure map as pointing two opposite ways, yet Kevin never means that. Lulu concludes the map's meaning is not just what Kevin means. The secret sauce: whatever a reader sees in the map counts as included in its meaning.

Step 2 · The kid story

Kevin's Two-Way Treasure Map

Kevin drew a treasure map for recess. Everyone agreed it was a masterpiece: tiny dinosaurs, a pineapple pizza landmark, the works. But Owen read it and said, 'This arrow says go left to the slide, and this one says go right!' Kevin was offended. 'I never draw maps that send you two ways at once. Nobody making a great map does that!' Lulu tapped her clipboard. 'Then a map's meaning can't just be whatever the mapmaker meant. Owen sees two ways, and you meant one.' Priya added, 'That only works if what Owen sees counts as included in the meaning. If his reading doesn't count, your intent could still be the whole story.' Kevin sighed and drew a third arrow. It pointed at the snack table.

Step 3 · Try the model question

Sometimes a reader thinks a great treasure map points two opposite ways. But nobody drawing a great map means it to point two opposite ways. So a map's meaning is not simply whatever its maker intends.

The reasoning above relies on which assumption?

Choices

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Two-Way Recipe Card

A famous chef sued a newspaper for saying her recipe card 'means two things at once.' Her lawyer argued, 'My client never writes a recipe that tells you to bake and to freeze at the same time. The card means only what she intends!' Mr. Whitfield, for the newspaper, rose. 'Your Honor, many cooks read that card and saw both instructions. My client says the card's meaning is more than the chef's intent.' The judge peered over her glasses. 'Then your case needs one thing, Mr. Whitfield: that what readers find on the card is included in its meaning.' He nodded. 'Without that, our whole argument falls through the floor.'

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 129, Section 2, Question 24 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

Write the premises and the conclusion side by side and notice the new idea in the conclusion that the premises never link up. Ask what must be true for a reader's view to have any say over meaning. Then use Pull the Plank: negate each choice and see if the argument collapses. Skip choices about how often readers disagree or about what authors usually intend; they do not hold up the bridge.