Critical Reasoning

28. Since Mayor Drabble always repays her political debts as soon as possible, she will almost certainly appoint Lee to be the new head of the arts commission. Lee has wanted that job for a long time, and Drabble owes Lee a lot for his support in the last election.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. Mayor Drabble has no political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.
B. There is no one to whom Mayor Drabble owes a greater political debt for support in the last election than the political debt she owes to Lee.
C. Lee is the only person to whom Mayor Drabble owes a political debt who would be willing to accept an appointment from her as the new head of the arts commission.
D. Whether Lee is qualified to head the arts commission is irrelevant to Mayor Drabble's decision
E. The only way that Mayor Drabble can adequately repay her political debt to Lee is by appointing him to head the arts commission.

have a confusion between A and E. Please help resolve.

TIA

Since Mayor Drabble always repays her political debts as soon as possible, she will almost certainly appoint Lee to be the new head of the arts commission. Lee has wanted that job for a long time, and Drabble owes Lee a lot for his support in the last election.

Almost certainly, makes me to choose E.

E. The only way that Mayor Drabble can adequately repay her political debt to Lee is by appointing him to head the arts commission.

If you like (E), you have already found your reason for rejecting (A). Notice that in (A) we're imagining a potential other debt to some other person who "could as suitably re repaid by" the same appointment. Fine; appoint Lee to the head of the arts commission, and the hypothetical other person to some other, equally-adequate post. (A) only is an Assumption if, in fact, it mentioned that the hypothetical other debt could ONLY be repaid by the post promised to Lee. (E) ties this all up nicely for us without the hypothetical.

28. Since Mayor Drabble always repays her political debts as soon as possible, she will almost certainly appoint Lee to be the new head of the arts commission. Lee has wanted that job for a long time, and Drabble owes Lee a lot for his support in the last election.

This was tough (still tough for me).

I think the correct answer is (A).

Why? Mayor Drabble always repays her political debts "as soon as possible". But Drabble could owe the same "arts commission" position to someone else "Mr. X" whom Drabble has been indebted to longer than Lee. Therefore, for the argument to hold, Lee must have both a longer standing debt and can be suitably repaid with the appointment. Expressed in answer choice A.

E. I think this is a Sufficient assumption, but it is not necessary.
Because even if the appointment was not the only way to repay the debt, the argument could still hold.

Thoughts??

the correct answer is A.

Source : 300+ GMAT CR questions posted on the forum

sharmishtha_goel wrote:the correct answer is A.

Source : 300+ GMAT CR questions posted on the forum

Does it come with an official explanation?
I'd be interested in their take or the explanation from the experts.

sharmishtha_goel wrote:28. Since Mayor Drabble always repays her political debts as soon as possible, she will almost certainly appoint Lee to be the new head of the arts commission. Lee has wanted that job for a long time, and Drabble owes Lee a lot for his support in the last election.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. Mayor Drabble has no political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.
B. There is no one to whom Mayor Drabble owes a greater political debt for support in the last election than the political debt she owes to Lee.
C. Lee is the only person to whom Mayor Drabble owes a political debt who would be willing to accept an appointment from her as the new head of the arts commission.
D. Whether Lee is qualified to head the arts commission is irrelevant to Mayor Drabble's decision
E. The only way that Mayor Drabble can adequately repay her political debt to Lee is by appointing him to head the arts commission.

have a confusion between A and E. Please help resolve.

TIA

A

Explanation.... Anyone?
If (A) is correct. Tell us why.

Right now we have (A) in the Red corner
And (E) in the Blue corner

Place your Bets! (Oops, hope I didn't go too far)

IMO A

For Assumption questions few points to keep in mind:

No No to extreme language. (all, only,Cannot etc.)
Consider all answers with moderate language (at least, some, probably,may etc.)
Cause - effect scenarios
Denial Test on answer you consider correct.

A. Mayor Drabble has no political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.
B. There is no one to whom Mayor Drabble owes a greater political debt for support in the last election than the political debt she owes to Lee. (extreme)
C. Lee is the only person to whom Mayor Drabble owes a political debt who would be willing to accept an appointment from her as the new head of the arts commission. (extreme)
D. Whether Lee is qualified to head the arts commission is irrelevant to Mayor Drabble's decision
E. The only way that Mayor Drabble can adequately repay her political debt to Lee is by appointing him to head the arts commission. (extreme)

Perform denial test on A and D

D-->Whether Lee is qualified to head the arts commission is RELEVANT to Mayor Drabble's decision. Supporting conclusion somehow. We know that this option is wrong because after denying there is no harm to the conclusion that "she will almost certainly appoint Lee to be the new head of the arts commission."

We are left with A

Lets do a denial test for sake of clarification.

Mayor Drabble HAS political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and COULD NOT as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.

If the dept cannot be paid by appointing the guy as head of the arts commission, the conclusion will stand no more .

Hope its clear!

Since Mayor Drabble always repays her political debts as soon as possible...

A) Mayor Drabble has no political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.

IMO A.

B. Irrelevant, as even if someone was there who Mayor owed greater political debt it is not clear if she could repay by better methods than appointing 'Him\Her' as head of arts commission. Hence reject.

C. Again, there is no mention of debts and repayments of other people.

D. Not relevant.

E. This is of less concern, as even if it was not the only way it would not matter if Mayor chose this way to repay Lee.

A. This option is most clear, uses very safe words like "..could as suitably be repaid by..." rather than extreme words. The fact that "..Mayor Drabble has no political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee .." goes with the question "..always repays her political debts as soon as possible, she will almost certainly appoint Lee.. ". Most appropriate choice.

smackmartine wrote: No No to extreme language. (all, only,Cannot etc.)
Consider all answers with moderate language (at least, some, probably,may etc.)

Totally agree with this. But this would not necessarily apply to Sufficient assumption questions correct?

smackmartine wrote: Denial Test on answer you consider correct.

A. Mayor Drabble has no political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.

D. Whether Lee is qualified to head the arts commission is irrelevant to Mayor Drabble's decision
E. The only way that Mayor Drabble can adequately repay her political debt to Lee is by appointing him to head the arts commission. (extreme)

I think if I was in test mode I might have chosen D. It was down to A and D for me too. I didn't bother with E on my first attempt (timed). On review, I took a closer look at A, D and E.

smackmartine wrote: Perform denial test on A and D

D-->Whether Lee is qualified to head the arts commission is RELEVANT to Mayor Drabble's decision. Supporting conclusion somehow. We know that this option is wrong because after denying there is no harm to the conclusion that "she will almost certainly appoint Lee to be the new head of the arts commission."

We are left with A

Lets do a denial test for sake of clarification.

Mayor Drabble HAS political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and COULD NOT as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.

@smackmartine, I get the negation rule, but I'm not sure the above statement is a negation of answer choice (A). I think the negation of (A) should be:

Mayor Drabble HAS SOME political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.

What do you think?

PS. Otherwise, I'm in total agreement with your analysis. Thanks!

XLOGIC Wrote :

Mayor Drabble HAS SOME political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.

In 1st part of the sentence "Some" is absolutely OK, however you have to make sure you negate 2nd part as well by saying "Debts COULD NOT be repaid" else the negation won't completely weaken the conclusion(which says debt can be repaid).

XLogic wrote:

sharmishtha_goel wrote:the correct answer is A.

Source : 300+ GMAT CR questions posted on the forum

Does it come with an official explanation?
I'd be interested in their take or the explanation from the experts.

no explanation there

smackmartine wrote:

XLOGIC Wrote :

Mayor Drabble HAS SOME political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.

In 1st part of the sentence "Some" is absolutely OK, however you have to make sure you negate 2nd part as well by saying "Debts COULD NOT be repaid" else the negation won't completely weaken the conclusion(which says debt can be repaid).

Hmm, not to drag this out, but...
Here's a post in response to the negation of answer choice (A)

timmydoeslsat wrote: ...
To negate this answer choice: "Mayor Drabble has no political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission. "

Look at what this is saying. It is quite interesting. The argument says that Drabble has a debt to Lee and that he wants a certain job. Drabble also always repays her political debts as soon as possible.

However, for the argument to conclude "she will almost certainly appoint Lee" isn't it necessary for Drabble not to have a longer standing debt to someone else that is interested in that same job?!

Imagine the conflict!

Anyways, to negate this, think about what this is saying.
Mayor Drabble has no political debt that is both A & B.
To negate this concept, simply say that she does have a political debt that is both A & B.

It suggests that the argument can be abstracted as...
X has no Y's that are both A's and B's

therefore the negation should be:
X has some Y's that are both A's and B's
i.e.,
X has at least one Y that is both A and B

If Mayor Drabble has been indebted to [Mr. Goodluv] longer than she's been indebted to Lee, and she could repay [Mr. Goodluv] suitably with the appointment, then it isn't almost certain that she'd appoint Lee. --> Boom! goes the argument.