LSAT (Law School Admission Test)Logical ReasoningMedium
A historian argues: 'The decline of the Roman Empire was primarily due to its overreliance on slave labor. This reliance stifled innovation, as there was little incentive to develop labor-saving technologies, ultimately leading to economic stagnation and military weakness.' Which of the following is an assumption on which the historian's argument depends?
- AEconomic stagnation and military weakness were the sole causes of the Roman Empire's decline.
- BOther ancient empires that did not rely on slave labor flourished indefinitely.
- CThere were no other significant factors contributing to the decline of the Roman Empire.
- DThe development of labor-saving technologies would have prevented the Roman Empire's decline.
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: D. The development of labor-saving technologies would have prevented the Roman Empire's decline.
The historian claims that overreliance on slave labor led to a lack of innovation, which *then* led to decline. For this chain of causation to hold, the historian must assume that if those labor-saving technologies *had* been developed (i.e., if innovation hadn't been stifled), the decline would have been averted or significantly mitigated.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. The historian states slave labor was the *primarily* cause, not the *sole* cause, and economic stagnation/military weakness were *outcomes* of the lack of innovation, not necessarily the sole causes of decline.
- B. This is too strong. The argument doesn't need to claim that *any* empire without slavery would flourish indefinitely, only that slavery contributed to Rome's specific decline.
- C. The word 'primarily' indicates that other factors could exist, so assuming 'no other significant factors' is too strong and not required.
Necessary Assumption (Causal Chain)
An unstated premise that links the steps in a causal chain, ensuring that each cause-and-effect relationship in the sequence is valid for the overall conclusion to hold.
- Connects intermediate steps in a causal argument
- Must be true for the chain to remain unbroken
- Often relates to the sufficiency of a cause
Memory trick: Every link in the chain must hold!