LSAT Explanation PT 23, S3, Q8: If a person chooses to walk

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? 

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 passage states that if a person chooses to walk rather than drive, there is one less vehicle emitting pollution. The conclusion is that if people would walk whenever it is feasible for them to do so, pollution will be greatly reduced. The premise is that walking instead of driving leads to one less vehicle emitting pollution.

To better understand this argument, imagine a simple example: If 10 people in a neighborhood choose to walk to the nearby grocery store instead of driving, there would be 10 fewer cars on the road emitting pollution. If this behavior was consistent, it could lead to a reduction in overall pollution.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "How often do people currently drive when it is feasible for them to walk instead?"

Now, let's analyze the answer choices. The question type is Necessary Assumption, which means we are looking for an assumption that the argument depends on.

a) Cutting down on pollution can be achieved in a variety of ways.

This answer choice is not necessary for the argument. The argument focuses on walking as a way to reduce pollution, not on the variety of ways to reduce pollution.

b) Taking public transportation rather than driving is not always feasible.

This answer choice is also not necessary for the argument. The argument is about walking, not public transportation.

c) Walking is the only feasible alternative to driving that results in a reduction in pollution.

This answer choice is not necessary for the argument. The argument does not depend on walking being the only feasible alternative; it focuses on the impact of walking as an alternative to driving.

d) There are people who never drive but who often walk.

This answer choice is not necessary for the argument. The argument is about the impact of people choosing to walk instead of driving, not about people who never drive.

e) People sometimes drive when it is feasible to walk instead.

This is the correct answer choice. The argument depends on the assumption that there are instances where people choose to drive when they could feasibly walk instead. If everyone already walked whenever feasible, the conclusion that pollution would be greatly reduced would not hold true.

In conclusion, the correct answer is E, as the argument depends on the assumption that people sometimes drive when it is feasible to walk instead.