#9 - If a person chooses to walk rather than drive, there is one less

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Assumption. The correct answer choice is (E).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice.

[wisesther]

I would like someone to explain why answer choice (E) is the correct one.

[Adam Tyson]

One of the best ways to test whether an Assumption answer is correct, wisesther, is to use the Assumption Negation TechniqueTM. Negate that answer, which means make it untrue. If that negation destroys the argument, you have the right answer! This is because the correct answer is necessary - it must be true - if the argument is to hold water. Wrong answers will, when negated, strengthen the argument, or just weaken it a little, or do nothing at all. The right answer, when negated, takes away something essential and makes the argument fall apart.

Now, negate answer E. What if people never drive when it is feasible to walk? That is, what if everyone is already doing their part and only driving when they cannot walk to their destination? If that's true, then walking whenever feasible would not do anything to reduce pollution any further than it is, because we are all already doing all we can! If we have maximized our walking-to-driving ratio, we can't increase it any further, and cannot have any additional impact beyond what we have already done. The argument falls completely apart, proving that this is the correct answer!

Try that on the other answer choices and you'll see that none of them are necessary for this argument to work. And try this technique going forward on any contenders you may be contemplating for other Assumption questions, because it always works!

[wisesther]

Thank you!

[Christmaspuppy]

Could answer B be a sufficient assumption answer? Because taking a public transportation, as an alternative way, is not always feasible, choosing to walk could reduce pollution.

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Not quite, Christmaspuppy.

A sufficient assumption is an answer choice that absolutely positively proves the conclusion follows. The conclusion here is that pollution would be greatly reduced. Stating that public transportation is not always feasible does not prove that walking instead of driving would greatly reduce pollution. We still don't know how often people choose to drive instead of walk when walking would be feasible. Without that information we won't know how much pollution would be reduced. What if everyone already walks whenever feasible? Pollution wouldn't be reduced at all. What if everyone drives everywhere, even next door? Then walking when feasible would greatly reduce pollution. The result then, is without the information on how much people currently drive when they could walk we won't be able to prove this conclusion. Anything other than that could not be a correct justify the conclusion answer choice.

Hope that helps!

[Christmaspuppy]

Not quite, Christmaspuppy.

A sufficient assumption is an answer choice that absolutely positively proves the conclusion follows. The conclusion here is that pollution would be greatly reduced. Stating that public transportation is not always feasible does not prove that walking instead of driving would greatly reduce pollution. We still don't know how often people choose to drive instead of walk when walking would be feasible. Without that information we won't know how much pollution would be reduced. What if everyone already walks whenever feasible? Pollution wouldn't be reduced at all. What if everyone drives everywhere, even next door? Then walking when feasible would greatly reduce pollution. The result then, is without the information on how much people currently drive when they could walk we won't be able to prove this conclusion. Anything other than that could not be a correct justify the conclusion answer choice.

Hope that helps!

Thank you Rachael! This is very helpful!