#24 - Since Mayor Drabble always repays her political debts

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Assumption. The correct answer choice is (A)

The stimulus concludes that Mayor Drabble will almost certainly appoint Lee to be the head of the new arts commission, because Mayor Drabble repays her political debts quickly, and she owes Lee for his assistance, and Lee wants the job.

The stimulus assumes, among other things, that Mayor Drabble doesn’t owe someone else the position even more. Any number of other factors and debts could, if considered, lead to the conclusion that the mayor will not appoint Lee to the position. Since you are asked to identify a necessary assumption, you need to focus on the fact that the argument ignores a great many possible considerations.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. The argument has to assume that Mayor Drabble doesn’t owe someone else the position even more. If she does, then it would not make sense to conclude that she will offer the position to Lee, so this choice represents a critical assumption.

Answer choice (B): The argument does not need to assume that the mayor owes no one else more. Even if the mayor owes others more than she owes Lee, those other people might want different positions than Lee wants. Even though this response would greatly strengthen Lee’s case, it is not essential that the mayor is not in greater debt to other people who do not want the arts job, so this choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): It does not matter whether Lee is the only person the mayor owes who wants the arts job, because even if a great many people want the job, Mayor Drabble might be most indebted to Lee. Even though it would strengthen Lee’s case that no other person the mayor is indebted to wants the job, that is not essential to Lee’s case, so this choice is wrong.

Answer choice (D): This choice was designed to penalize people who make a gut objection to the argument, simply select the relevant choice, and then move on. Maybe it is important that a person be qualified for a job, but even if your attention went immediately to this incorrect choice, you should ask yourself: is it essential that qualification is not a factor? Well, it you should not unjustifiably presume that Lee is not qualified. Since Lee, and any other candidate, could be qualified, qualification could be an issue without affecting the validity of the argument, so this choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (E): Since the argument only concluded that it is almost certain that Mayor Drabble will appoint Lee to the arts job, it is not necessary to assume that the arts job is the only satisfactory means of paying her debt to Lee. Other jobs could be satisfactory, but Lee’s long-term desire for the arts job could still weigh the mayor’s decision in favor of offering the arts job, or perhaps she owes other people who would get the other jobs before she would offer them to Lee. Since this choice does not pass the negation test, this choice is incorrect.

[willyhud]

I can't see any reason to prefer answer choice (A) over (E)

(A) does have the element of time in the answer choice, as does the stimulus, while (E) does not, but I'm not sure why it must be assumed in (A) that the Mayor "has no political debt" that is "of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee". The statement (stimulus) that the Mayor "repays her political debts as soon as possible" does NOT mean to me that there's a first in, first out temporal relationship in repaying those debts.

[Steve Stein]

Hi,

That's a good question--you're right, it can't just be based on time--the right answer choice provides the assumption that there is no longer standing debt that could be as suitably repaid as Lee's. To confirm that the argument relies on this assumption, we can apply PowerScore's Assumption Negation Technique, and negate, or take away, this assumption, to see whether doing so will weaken the author's argument. When we take away this choice's assumption, we get the following:

"There are some people (at least one) to whom the mayor owes a longer standing debt that could be as suitably repaid with that appointment."

Since the author's conclusion is based on the fact that the mayor likes to repay her political debts quickly, this negated assumption would weaken the author's argument.

As for answer choice E, that one provides that the mayor has no other way to repay her debt to Lee. While this would certainly strengthen the case for appointing Lee, it is not an assumption on which the author's argument relies. To confirm this, we can again negate, or take away, this assumption, and note whether the author's argument suffers:

"There are other ways that the mayor can repay her political debt to Lee."

Since taking away this choice's assumption does not weaken the author's argument, this cannot be an assumption on which the author's argument relies.

I hope that's helpful--let me know--thanks!

~Steve

[willyhud]

Awesome. Makes sense. Thank you

[bk1111]

I correctly chose A, but I am having a hard time eliminating D. Can someone explain why that is incorrect? When negated, it says "Whether or not Lee is qualified is relevant to the decision" I don't know how to weigh that against the argument's conclusion?

[Adam Tyson]

If Lee's qualifications are relevant, bk1111, then perhaps he might not get the appointment after all? The author wants us to believe the appointment is almost certain, based solely on the debt and what Lee wants. If other factors, like qualifications, matter, than wrecks the argument by introducing some previously unconsidered factor. We have no way of knowing whether Lee is qualified. Suddenly things don't look all that certain for Lee, do they?

[bk1111]

If Lee's qualifications are relevant, bk1111, then perhaps he might not get the appointment after all? The author wants us to believe the appointment is almost certain, based solely on the debt and what Lee wants. If other factors, like qualifications, matter, than wrecks the argument by introducing some previously unconsidered factor. We have no way of knowing whether Lee is qualified. Suddenly things don't look all that certain for Lee, do they?

This is helpful, thank you!

[sseyedali]

Hi,

That's a good question--you're right, it can't just be based on time--the right answer choice provides the assumption that there is no longer standing debt that could be as suitably repaid as Lee's. To confirm that the argument relies on this assumption, we can apply PowerScore's Assumption Negation Technique, and negate, or take away, this assumption, to see whether doing so will weaken the author's argument. When we take away this choice's assumption, we get the following:

"There are some people (at least one) to whom the mayor owes a longer standing debt that could be as suitably repaid with that appointment."

Since the author's conclusion is based on the fact that the mayor likes to repay her political debts quickly, this negated assumption would weaken the author's argument.

As for answer choice E, that one provides that the mayor has no other way to repay her debt to Lee. While this would certainly strengthen the case for appointing Lee, it is not an assumption on which the author's argument relies. To confirm this, we can again negate, or take away, this assumption, and note whether the author's argument suffers:

"There are other ways that the mayor can repay her political debt to Lee."

Since taking away this choice's assumption does not weaken the author's argument, this cannot be an assumption on which the author's argument relies.

I hope that's helpful--let me know--thanks!

~Steve

If there are other ways that the mayor can repay her political debt to Lee, doesnt that mean that its not the case that 'she will almost certainly appoint Lee..."? Because there are other ways that they could repay Lee, that doesnt include appointing them. I am just struggling a bit with discerning (A) and (E).

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

It's because the conclusion isn't certain here, sseyedali. It doesn't say she WILL make the appointment. It says she almost certainly will appoint Lee. That's enough wiggle room to mean that the "only" doesn't isn't required. For example, if you see a swan, it's almost certainly white. That doesn't require that the only swans are white. Just like here, saying something is almost certain doesn't require that it is the only option.

Answer choice (A) supports the reason given for the conclusion. Let's look at the assumption negation technique for answer choice (A). That would mean there are longer standing debts that would be repaid by the relevant appointment. The negated form weakens the conclusion that she will almost certainly appoint Lee to that position, because it means there is someone ahead of him in line.

Hope that helps!

[sseyedali]

That's helpful, thank you very much, Rachael.