LSAT Explanation PT 36, S1, Q3: Finnish author Jaakko Mikkeli was accused

LSAT Question Stem

The argument in Mikkeli's defense depends on the assumption that 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Necessary Assumption question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is C. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The argument revolves around the plagiarism accusation by Kirsten Halden against Jaakko Mikkeli. Mikkeli's defense is based on two premises:

Premise 1: Mikkeli does not understand Norwegian, the language of Halden's book.

Premise 2: No reviews of Halden's book have been published.

From these premises, Mikkeli concludes that plagiarism was impossible in this case. The conclusion of the argument is that Mikkeli did not plagiarize Halden's book.

Now, let's think of an "Evaluate" question for this argument: "Is there any other way Mikkeli could have learned about the plot of Halden's book?"

The question type for this problem is Necessary Assumption. We need to identify the assumption that Mikkeli's defense depends on.

Answer Choice (A): Mikkeli has never met Halden.

This answer choice is not required by the argument. Even if Mikkeli has met Halden, it doesn't necessarily mean that he learned about the plot of Halden's book. So, this answer choice is incorrect.

Answer Choice (B): Halden's book did not become popular in Norway.

This answer choice is also irrelevant to the argument. The popularity of Halden's book in Norway doesn't affect the likelihood that Mikkeli encountered the plot since he doesn't understand Norwegian. So, this answer choice is incorrect.

Answer Choice (C): Nobody related the plot of Halden's book in detail to Mikkeli before Mikkeli wrote his book.

This answer choice is the correct one. Mikkeli's defense relies on the assumption that there were no other ways for him to access Halden's story. If we negate this assumption, i.e., "Someone told Halden's plot to Mikkeli," Mikkeli's defense is defeated. So, this is the necessary assumption for Mikkeli's argument.

Answer Choice (D): There is a common European myth to which both authors referred subconsciously in the books in question.

This answer choice might actually work against Mikkeli's defense, making it more likely that there was similarity. It cannot be an assumption on which the defense relies. So, this answer choice is incorrect.

Answer Choice (E): Mikkeli is not familiar with Old Icelandic, an extinct language related to an earlier form of Norwegian.

This answer choice is irrelevant to the argument, as Old Icelandic is not even mentioned in the passage. So, this answer choice is incorrect.

In conclusion, the correct answer is (C): Nobody related the plot of Halden's book in detail to Mikkeli before Mikkeli wrote his book. This is the necessary assumption on which Mikkeli's defense depends.