Justify the Conclusion V Assumption ?

[leslie7]

Hi, I've dived into chapter 11 and I see on the side of page 370 2020 ed. there's a nice example of Suff vs necessary assumption. Can someone make a similar example to differentiate Assumption vs. justify the conclusion?

Or give a conceptual understanding that undergirds the difference between the two?

I might have missed it in the threads or in the book if that's the case I apologize, I couldn't find anything other than the textbook going over the question stems...

Thanks so much!

[Adam Tyson]

The key to that difference, leslie7, is in the other common names for those two questions: Justify the Conclusion is also called Sufficient Assumption, while Assumptions are also known as Necessary Assumptions. So a Justify answer is one that is strong enough and certain enough to make the conclusion necessary. It is sufficient to prove the argument. But an Assumption answer is one that the argument makes necessary - it has to be true if the argument is correct.

Here's an example:

There is a strong positive correlation between people who visit zoos and people who have young children. Therefore, visiting a zoo leads to having children.

Assumption answer (something that must be true if we accept this argument): People do not visit zoos because they already have children.

Justify (something that would prove the argument is correct): The only possible explanation for this correlation is that zoo visits cause people to have children.

[Dave Killoran]

Let me add that we did two podcasts on this topic that you might find helpful too, episodes 11 and 12 at: https://www.powerscore.com/lsat/podcast/

Thanks!