Does "presuppose" belong with group 2 indicators?

Bomhillz

Presuppose defined as "require as a precondition of possibility or coherence. synonyms: require, necessitate, imply, entail, mean, involve, assume"

Alex

@Bomhillz said:
Presuppose defined as "require as a precondition of possibility or coherence. synonyms: require, necessitate, imply, entail, mean, involve, assume"

Yes, it's literal definition is to require or necessitate something. Depending on the context, I would put my money on it fitting in the group 2 (necessary indicators)

akistotle

I believe it sometimes does act as a Group 2 indicator, but I think that in most cases "presuppose" is used as "assume" on the LSAT. There is a common circular reasoning answer choice that says "the argument presupposes the truth of what it sets out to prove."

presuppose: to think that something is true in advance without having any proof, or to consider that something is necessarily true if something else is true
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/presuppose

That being said, I think PT8.S1.Q22 (MSS) could an example of "presuppose" as a Group 2 indicator. (I can't link the question but it's in the Question Bank!)

[Other people's argument]
Feudalism presupposed the existence of a noble class.
F --> NC

[Author's argument]
But the existence of a noble class requires laws sanctioning titles etc.
NC --> law (/law --> /NC)
In 8th century, feudalism existed. But laws sanctioning titles first appeared in 12th century.
8th century: F and /law

---

F and /NC

Correct AC sort of says: /(F --> NC)
It's not the case that feudalism presupposed the existence of a noble class.