June 1993 LSAT Section 4 Question 21

So–called environmentalists have argued that the proposed Golden Lake Development would interfere with bird–migration...

kgbnd on October 14, 2021

Wrong category

This question is a Strengthen with Necessary Premise, but it is included in the Strengthen with Sufficient Premise Analytics section. It should be removed

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Mazen on October 19, 2022

I am not a tutor; but I believe this is a strengthen with a sufficient question for the following reason.

The question is "for the claim to be properly drawn." In other words, the question asks about what triggers the concern expressed in the argument; and the trigger or the antecedent is the sufficient condition that allow for the conclusion or in this case the necessary - referring to the environmentalists' concern - to follow.

As I was, you were probably surprised that the key answer offered the negation of each answer, which is usually done for strengthen with necessary premise questions; but this has no bearing on the question stem. Enjoy the extra practice on negated statements.

I hope I am not wrong; and more importantly, I hope that a real expert will correct me and support your recommendation to remove this question from the strengthen with sufficient category.

Mazen