October 2010 LSAT Section 1 Question 1

By referring to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as "purely programmatic" (line 49) in nature, the author mo...

cannedfun on March 16, 2023

str w/necc premise

This negation test for necessary premise is so dang cool! I wouldve thrown out e on 10 almost straight away with a thought that food making molting consistent doesn't preclude other things that would make it inconsistent, along with the fact that the passage doesnt even mention food. Now I see that the secret sauce is in the negation and subsequent destruction of the premise.

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

Already have an account? log in

Emil-Kunkin on March 17, 2023

Great! I just wanted to point out that negation can sometimes be helpful in a slightly different ways on must be true questions as well. Suff assumption questions are asking us what must the author believe, so a correct answer when negated will be something that the author cannot believe. For must be true questions, a correct answer when negated should be inconsistent with the passage, or, cannot be True