Hi,

Your concern about the extremity of answer option E is certainly valid.

However, considering other options E is best suited one. Following is my reasoning,

Alalysis: Here Grayson's experience as labor organizer and former head of one of most powerfull labor union makes him excellent choice. So statement in answer should support the consideration of this qualities to strangthen the argument.

Option A talks about supports of the nation's other leader. No where either explicitly or implicitly mentioned that Grayson had good wrapo with the other union leader. None of his quality states anything about this. Still Grayson is an excellent choice.

Option B - Out of the context. It's not telling why Grayson's qualities are considered important for this job.

Option C talks about the communication with the leader's of nation's largest labor unions. Again same as option A it's not fitting with the any of the Grayson's quality which makes him excellent.

Option D is totally irrelevent with the conclusion.

Option E tells us that job requires understanding of needs and problems of labor. Now Grayson is an experienced labor organizer and he had already head the nation's most powerful union. It implicitly tells us that Grayson understands matters associated with the labor union, their need and problems. So it goes well.

I hope this answers your question.

E strengthens just the premise, not the conclusion. It is B despite the OA.

@ jason11

dude... to strengthen the conclusion, u can add an additional premise..
choice E will work as an additional premise and HENCE will certainly strengthen da conclusion... :!:

As stated in many posts that "extreme" words are acceptable in Strengthen and Weaken questions , please do not take into consideration the tone of the language when resolving these type of questions.

So let us concentrate on the conclusion now

"Grayson is an excellent choice to chair the new council on business-labor relations."

(A) The new council must have the support of the nation’s labor leaders if it is to succeed. - New info but does nothing to strengthen the conclusion.
(B) During his years as a labor leader, Grayson established a record of good relations with business leaders. --This still does not explain why Grayson would be a excellent choice .
(C) The chair of the new council must be a person who can communicate directly with the leaders of the nation’s largest labor unions. -- Sure fair enough. Falls in the new info category again but does not how Grayson is the excellent choice.
(D) Most of the other members of the new council will be representatives of business management interests. -- Totally out of question
(E) An understanding of the needs and problems of labor is the only qualification necessary for the job of chairing the new council. -This choice clearly explain the "only" criteria required to chair the new council and as the premise supports this , this option clearly strengtens the conclusion.

As far as i know the extreme answer choices can be applied for
1)assumption
2)must be true/conclusion

Strengthen and weaken the more extreme the better because u r asked to strngthrn or weaken ...Plus ans choice can be outside the argument

Do correct me if i am wrong on this

Thanks
Krishna

:

I would choose E. But i am not sure of my answer