LSAT Explanation PT 25, S2, Q24: Trade official: Country X deserves economic

LSAT Question Stem

The argument depends on assuming which one of the following principles? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Necessary Assumption question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is E. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

First, let's break down the argument in the passage. The trade official argues that Country X deserves economic retribution for its protectionism. However, they also mention that there are overriding considerations in this case, which are the high demand for agricultural imports from Country X. As a result, the trade official concludes that they should still sell the agricultural equipment to Country X. The conclusion of the argument is that they should still sell the agricultural equipment to Country X, and the premises are that Country X deserves economic retribution for its protectionism and that there are overriding considerations (high demand for agricultural imports) in this case.

Now, let's create an "Evaluate" question for this argument: "Is the high demand for agricultural imports from Country X enough to override the need for economic retribution?"

The question type for this LSAT problem is Necessary Assumption. We need to identify the principle that the argument depends on assuming.

Let's analyze the answer choices:

a) This answer choice is not necessary because the argument does not make a comparison between agricultural and nonagricultural commodities. The focus is on the high demand for agricultural imports and the need for economic retribution.

b) This answer choice is not necessary because the argument does not discuss the importance of entering international markets, nor does it compare this to the availability of popular products domestically.

c) This answer choice is too strong and not necessary. The argument does not require that the interests of the people should never be jeopardized to punish a protectionist country. Instead, the argument focuses on the specific case of selling agricultural equipment to Country X and the high demand for agricultural imports.

d) This answer choice undermines the argument by suggesting that punishing a protectionist country should have priority over the interests of the people. This is not necessary for the argument, which focuses on the specific case of selling agricultural equipment to Country X.

e) This answer choice is the correct one because it captures the idea that the justice of an action (economic retribution for protectionism) should be balanced with the consequences for our interests (high demand for agricultural imports) when deciding what action to take. This principle is necessary for the argument to make sense, as it provides a reason to consider the high demand for agricultural imports as an overriding consideration.

In conclusion, the correct answer is E because it is a necessary assumption for the argument. The argument depends on the principle that the justice of an action should be balanced with the consequences for our interests when deciding what action to take.