Necessary Assumption II: Defender Assumptions & "Takes for Granted"
Necessary Assumption II: Defender Assumptions
A second common pattern within Necessary Assumption: an assumption that defends the argument against an obvious objection, rather than bridging a premise-to-conclusion gap directly.
1. Defender Assumptions
These rule out a specific alternative explanation or objection the reader would naturally raise. "Takes for granted that X" stems often point here — the argument implicitly assumes away a challenge without addressing it directly.
2. Spotting the Objection First
Before checking answer choices, ask: "what's the most obvious objection a skeptical reader would raise against this argument?" A defender-assumption answer usually rules that objection out.
3. Negation Test Still Applies
Same verification tool as yesterday — negate the candidate defender assumption and check whether the objection it was blocking comes back into play.
Practice items on this page are curriculum-authored in LSAT style; they are not official LSAC questions. Real drilling happens on LawHub — see the assignment below.
Q1. Argument: "Company X's new factory will create 500 local jobs, so the town's unemployment will fall." What obvious objection does this argument need to defend against?
LawHub drill-tier LR section, untimed. Scan for "takes for granted" and "depends on" Necessary Assumption stems.
Saturday: Week 5 synthesis, directly contrasting Flaw and Necessary Assumption — the two types most often confused with each other.