Critical Reasoning

Hi there,

Could you explain to me what is the reasonning for this CR



Seven countries signed a treaty binding each of them to perform specified actions on a certain fixed date, with the actions of each conditional on simultaneous action taken by the other countries. Each country was also to notify the six other countries when it had completed its action.

The simultaneous-action provision of the treaty leaves open the possibility that

(A) the compliance date was subject to postponement, according to the terms of the treaty
(B) one of the countries might not be required to make any changes or take any steps in order to comply with the treaty, whereas all the other countries are so required
(C) each country might have a well-founded excuse, based on the provision, for its own lack of compliance
(D) the treaty specified that the signal for one of the countries to initiate action was notification by the other countries that they had completed action
(E) there was ambiguity with respect to the date after which all actions contemplated in the treaty are to be complete

IMO C...if all the countries are involved in the treaty and dependent on each other action then where is the starting point...who should independently start and the other action should follow simultaneously...

OA please

I would go with Option D.

Whats the OA?

I would go with option D. Other options talk about date, which is not so relevant.

D:

Others cannot start thier action until the previous completed its action.

ImO B

For eg :: there may be a case that when it is day in one country , its night in another...so other country has to change its working hours to comply to treaty...

IMO is C.
Basically we need to weaken the argument.

A- Definitely out of scope.
B-The premise says that they all signed a treaty. If one of them do not need to make changes, then why sign? Out of scope.
C-Yes!There might have a double-talking among 6 countries. Namely, even if 6 countries signed a treaty, every country has a different interpretation of the treaty. You see what I mean?
D-It seems strengthen the argument, or at least it repeats the premise.
E-.."date"... It has no bearing. Irrelevant.

Hope this helps and let me know if I'm wrong.

In my opinion C is the most logical one.