Practice Quiz

LSAT

Category - Logical Reasoning

Start a Study Session Sign up for Question of the Day
There is no doubt that animal rights activists have contributed to the recent demand for fur. Every time they denounce wearing fur, it becomes more hip and forbidden to wear, ironically triggering a greater demand for it. We should hold animal rights activists responsible for this unfortunate development.

Which of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
  1. Even unintended consequences are foreseeable.
  2. If animal rights activists stop their campaigns, demand for fur will decrease.
  3. Demand for fur cannot increase without a change in its image.
  4. Demand for fur is not a positive development.
  5. People can be held responsible for something they did not intend.
Explanation
Answer: E - The argument assumes that people can be held responsible for something they did not intend. Animal rights activists clearly did not intend to increase demand for fur, so the argument assumes that you can hold someone responsible for an unintended result.
Previous Next
Was this helpful? Upvote!
Login to contribute your own answer or details
Start a Study Session Sign up for Question of the Day

Top questions

Related questions

Most popular on PracticeQuiz