#16 - Activist: Any member of the city council ought either

[Brook Miscoski]

Erica,

(C) doesn't do the job. If a council member voted for the proposal, that would be more reason, not less, for "at least one" council member to vote against the proposal (the goal is to defeat the proposal). So guaranteeing that no council member votes for the proposal (answer C) doesn't show why a council member should vote against it.

(B), on the other hand, explains why the council should decide rather than abstain and let the matter go to the voters. The passage states that if all the council members abstain, the matter will go to the voters. Thus, to prove that at least one council member should vote, you show that the voters shouldn't be entrusted with the decision.

[whardy21]

I chose D and I see why I was wrong. I have diagrammed the second sentence contrapositive as:

matter not decided by city's voters not all members abstain

Answer Choice A: All member abstain decided by city's voters

[George George]

@whardy21 Good catch!

[bruceg]

There are 2 correct answers but one is incorrect for a very specific reason.

(A) dont send to public BECAUSE they'll approve it
(B) dont sent to public BECAUSE (???)

(A) depends on a (extremely reasonable) assumption that the speaker doesn't want to proposal to pass. But because it's not stated explicitly in the passage, that assumption is potentially wrong. Maybe the media has been critical of the city council because they cant seem to vote on anything and everything is going to (costly) public votes. You don't have to know what other explanations there could be, only that a creative person could invent any number of other assumptions.

(B) offers to reason explaining WHY the speaker doesn't want it to go to a public vote, and so there's nothing to attack.

So a future habit I'll build is:
1. If you find an answer you like, don't just select it an move on, suspect it's a trap answer
2. Look at the other answers and see if any of the others could also be correct, even if less attractive at first glance
3. Especially look for answers that are short, a bit blunt/utilitarian, unadorned with explanations and nuance
4. Evaluate the remaining answers. For a "logically follows" question you're looking for something simple without a lot of nuance that gives wiggle room for it to be wrong. Assumptions give wiggle room so reject that one.

[Luke Haqq]

Hi bruceg!

In this stimulus, the activist notes that if all of the members of the city council abstain, then the matter will be decided by the voters. From this, the author concludes, "So at least one member of the city council should vote against the proposal."

However, the activist didn't provide any reasons why the matter should not be decided by voters. Answer choice (B) supplies this. If (B) were an added premise--if we were also told that "The proposal should not be decided by voters"--that would be sufficient for the conclusion to follow from the premises.

Just to offer some comments on your planned habits--

1. If you find an answer you like, don't just select it an move on, suspect it's a trap answer
2. Look at the other answers and see if any of the others could also be correct, even if less attractive at first glance

This can be fine to do, but it depends on what the test taker is trying to achieve. For instance, it's generally a good habit to be pre-phrasing answers when you're reading through a stimulus. This helps prepare you for the answer choices, even if what you've pre-phrased doesn't end up being one of them. If it is, however, that's a great reason to select the answer and move on. If a test taker is having a hard time getting through all of the logical reasoning section within the given time, that's also a background reason--since there isn't an indefinite amount of time, one might not be able to read all the answers for every question. Whether you read all the answers or not, you're right that it's a good habit to be on guard for trap answers.

4. Evaluate the remaining answers. For a "logically follows" question you're looking for something simple without a lot of nuance that gives wiggle room for it to be wrong. Assumptions give wiggle room so reject that one.

Perhaps you already know this, but wanted to clarify that this is a justify-the-reasoning type of question. Of the helper types of questions (strengthen, assumption, justify), a strengthen question asks for something that helps the conclusion in any amount, an assumption question is asking for a missing premise that is required for the conclusion to follow, and a justify question asks for a premise that, if added, is sufficient for the conclusion to follow.

[Canada101]

Hello,

I hope you are well.

I do not understand why A is incorrect. I am not fully convinced that A is out of scope. I do not believe it would be an unreasonable assumption to make that the activist does not want the city voters to vote because there is a chance they will vote in favor of the proposal. Now normally, I would be hesistant when it comes to strong language in an answer choice, but this is sufficient assumption question. I want to take my conclusion and make it as strong as possible (bring it to 100%). If A was true and inserted into the stimulus I believe it would do that, truly bring it to 100%. I'm very confused why A is incorrect and would appreciate your insight on this quesiton.


Q16 Activist: Any member of the city council ought either to vote against the proposal or to abstain. But if all the members abstain, the matter will be decided by the city’s voters. So at least one member of the city council should vote against the proposal.
The conclusion of the activist’s argument follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

A) If all the members of the city council abstain in the vote on the proposal, the city’s voters will definitely decide in favor of the proposal.
B) The proposal should not be decided by the city’s voters.
C) No members of the city council will vote in favor of the proposal.
D) If not every member of the city council abstains in the vote on the proposal, the matter will not be decided by the city’s voters.
E) If one member of the city council ought to vote against the proposal, the other members should abstain in the vote on the proposal.


The correct answer is B but I thought B would be more of a necessary assumption (something the author would have to agree with; something that needs to be true for the argument to even exist).


Thank you so much for taking the time to review and respond to my question.

[Stephanie Oswalt]

I see how this is right but I am confused a bit. I thought that ,maybe C would be right in saying that no members will vote in favor meaning that they don't want to vote in favor thats why they are making one city member council abstain.

secondly, for B I for some reason wrote down that it was incorrect because the stimulus never really focused on what the city voters should do but more on what the council members should do. I know this is incorrect but I am hoping you can help me try to to understand why my logic is off. I feel as if I am mixing question types and applying something i saw from one question into another.
If that makes sense?

Hi!

I have moved your question to the thread discussing this topic. Please review the above explanation and discussion, and let us know if that helps! Thanks!