LSAT Explanation PT 36, S1, Q20: Editorialist: To ensure justice in the

LSAT Question Stem

The editorialist's argument requires assuming which one of the following? 

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 analyze the argument in the passage. The editorialist presents the following premises and conclusion:

Premise 1: To ensure justice in the legal system, citizens must be capable of criticizing anyone involved in determining the punishment of criminals.

Premise 2: When the legal system's purpose is seen as deterrence, the system falls into the hands of experts whose specialty is to assess how potential lawbreakers are affected by the system's punishments.

Premise 3: Most citizens lack knowledge about such matters.

Conclusion: Justice is not then ensured in the legal system.

Now, let's create an "Evaluate" question about this argument: "Do citizens need knowledge about how the legal system's punishments affect potential lawbreakers in order to criticize experts in that area?"

The question type for this problem is Necessary Assumption, which means we need to find the assumption that is necessary for the argument to hold.

Let's examine each answer choice:

a) Most citizens view justice as primarily concerned with the assignment of punishment to those who deserve it.

- This answer choice is not necessary for the argument, as the argument is focused on the capability of citizens to criticize, not their views on justice.

b) In order to be just, a legal system must consider the effect that punishment will have on individual criminals.

- This answer choice is not necessary for the argument because the argument is about citizens' capability to criticize, not the factors that make a legal system just.

c) The primary concern in a legal system is to administer punishments that are just.

- This answer choice is not necessary for the argument because it does not address the citizens' capability to criticize, which is the main focus of the argument.

d) In a legal system, a concern for punishment is incompatible with an emphasis on deterrence.

- This answer choice is not necessary for the argument. The argument does not claim that punishment and deterrence are incompatible, but rather that when the focus is on deterrence, the system becomes less accessible to citizen criticism.

e) Citizens without knowledge about how the legal system's punishments affect potential lawbreakers are incapable of criticizing experts in that area.

- This answer choice is the correct one because it is necessary for the argument to hold. If citizens without knowledge about how punishments affect potential lawbreakers are capable of criticizing experts in that area, then the conclusion that justice is not ensured would not follow.

In conclusion, the correct answer is E, as it is the necessary assumption for the argument to be valid.