Critical Reasoning

With a record number of new companies starting up in Derderia, and with previously established companies adding many new jobs, a record number of new jobs were created last year in the Derderian economy. This year, previously established companies will not be adding as many new jobs overall as such companies added last year. Therefore, unless
a record number of companies start up this year, Derderia will not break its record for new jobs created.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

A. In a given year, new companies starting up create more new jobs on average than do previously established companies.
B. The number of people seeking employment is no larger this year than it was last year.
C. This year, the new companies starting up will not provide substantially more jobs per company than did new companies last year.
D. Previously established companies in Derderia will be less profitable this year than such companies were last year.
E. The number of jobs created in the Derderian economy last year was substantially larger than the number of jobs lost.

Can anyone explain why OA iS C
I tried to apply defender role but was not successful.

OA C

imoC

conclusion:Therefore, unless a record number of companies start up this year, Derderia will not break its record for new jobs created.

C: This year, the new companies starting up will not provide substantially more jobs per company than did new companies last year.

Negation rule:This year, the new companies starting up will provide substantially more jobs per company than did new companies last year.


Thus if this is the thing,then Derderia might break its record for new jobs created.

This goes against the conclusion and the argument falls apart.

Thus C

thx

Is "unless a record number of companies start up this year" also part of the conclusion? This bit throws me off, as it makes me believe that the author wants support that new startups this year could in fact break last year's record for jobs created (since existing jobs alone cannot break the record).

This reasoning has caused me to choose A, because A establishes that new companies create more jobs than existing companies. If this assumption weren't true - that is, if new companies do NOT create more jobs than existing companies do - then Derderia has no chance of breaking last year's record, which contradicts the "unless a record number of companies start up this year" statement.

I already understand the explanation for why C is correct, but I need an explanation for why A is incorrect. Could anyone please explain?

Thank you for your time.

lunarpower wrote:

trumpet1184 wrote:Is "unless a record number of companies start up this year" also part of the conclusion?

absolutely yes.

This bit throws me off, as it makes me believe that the author wants support that new startups this year could in fact break last year's record for jobs created (since existing jobs alone cannot break the record).

This reasoning has caused me to choose A, because A establishes that new companies create more jobs than existing companies. If this assumption weren't true - that is, if new companies do NOT create more jobs than existing companies do - then Derderia has no chance of breaking last year's record, which contradicts the "unless a record number of companies start up this year" statement.

I already understand the explanation for why C is correct, but I need an explanation for why A is incorrect. Could anyone please explain?

Thank you for your time.

this is not a correct interpretation of the word "unless".

you are interpreting "unless X, Y" as meaning that X must happen. this is really really really bad.

if you don't see why this is bad reasoning, let's apply it to another situation.
let's say a friend tells you, "unless you live in an unsafe neighborhood, i'll spend the night at your place." this obviously doesn't mean that you are trying to prove that you live in an unsafe neighborhood.

--

here's a better way to handle "unless" statements:

you can rephrase "unless X, Y" as
"one of X or Y MUST be true."

so, the conclusion of this particular argument may be rephrased as
"either a record # of companies start up this year OR derderia will NOT break its job creation record."

--

also, don't forget that an ASSUMPTION is a statement that is 100% NECESSARY for an argument to work - i.e., if the assumption is false, then the entire argument falls apart.

if you look at choice (a) you can see that it definitely doesn't HAVE to be true, so it's wrong.

Ron... u rock !!

@Ron....as you explained the meaning of Unless so this means that C strengthen one of the components of the conclusion which is derdia will not be able to break its record am i right

I am still confused with option A , C and B here

Good explanation.

lunarpower wrote:

B. The number of people seeking employment is no larger this year than it was last year.

this topic is irrelevant to the argument -- the argument is concerned only with the number of jobs being created, not with the number of individuals competing for those jobs once they have been created.

Thankyou Ron!. for the expalanation.

However I don't understand how come option B talks about people competing for job???

You have already explained the interpretation of Unless in this argument however I am not able to relate C to the conclusion of the arg

When you say that Unless X Y.....means that either X or Y......so that means????.....Can you please help me showing this link with the conclusion by using option C...

Thanks!

Option C stands correct quite clearly. Its an assumption question where in a cause is stated with the effect. So if there is a missing assumption, then there is some cause which isnt stated for the effect mentioned.

The effect/Conclusion : Unless
a record number of companies start up this year, Derderia will not break its record for new jobs created.

The cause: previously established companies will not be adding as many new jobs overall as such companies added last year.

Option C provides me with another cause. This year, the new companies starting up will not provide substantially more jobs per company than did new companies last year. If this shouldn't be the case, then i won't be needing more or a record number of companies to start up new this year.

It is like this. Say last year i had 50 companies starting up with 5000 jobs, with say 100 jobs per company. Now, this year, either i need 500 companies with more than 10 jobs per company OR i need only 10 companies with 500 jobs. In either case, i get the result.

Hope it helps.