Critical Reasoning

Unknown problems emerge with improving and growing populations and technologies. In order to solve new problems, one has to come up with innovative solutions. Such innovative solutions can be achieved through new political, economic and social arrangements, which take place in new institutions. However, institutions and arrangements are stable, hardly growing and hardly fading. So, given the difficulty to overcome outdated arrangements and institutions, extra effort should be employed in making new ones successful.

The writer of the above makes which of the following assumptions?

A - Inefficiency forces changes from old to new institutions.

B - Ordinary challenges require new solutions.

C - As outdated institutions fade, new ones smoothly fulfill their places.

D - Without growth, institutional change would be slower.

E - Reorganizing societies, as well as changing economies and technologies, takes new institutions and arrangements.

IMO E.....
Whats the OA? Please post

What's the source of this question? The question stem, tonally, doesn't feel like the GMAT.

Evidence:

Pop + Tech ---> Probs

New Inst/New Arrang ---> Innov. Solutions

Inst/Arrang = stable

Conclusion:

"extra effort" needed

The author is assuming that somehow "extra effort" will overcome the "stability" problem. We didn't read anything about how "effort" would affect institutions and arrangements.

Prediction: Effort can overcome the "stability" blocking "new"

There is an assumption that "effort" is the lynchpin. But what if effort makes zero difference? Then the argument falls apart! So, we know we have a strong assumption.

Let's examine some answer choices:

A "Inefficiency" is out of scope -- how does this relate to "extra effort"? Are we to ALSO assume that "extra effort" somehow relates to efficiency? Way too big a logical leap.

B Again, "ordinary" is out of scope. The passage focuses on "new"-ness. We cannot assume what is new is extra-ordinary.

C This seems to contradict the conclusion, which states that it is difficult to overcome outdated institutions. A correct assumption will NEVER contradict a conclusion.

D The rate of institutional change is not a necessary assumption. Extra effort can still be required whether institutional change would be slower w/growth or w/o growth.

E Again, we cannot assume "reorganizing societies" means "improving and growing populations and technologies." What if these are mutually exclusive ideas?

I find all of these answer choices pretty suspect. On a GMAT assumption question, the correct answer should head on address the "Concept Shift" in the conclusion. It doesn't make sense here for the author's conclusion to hinge on this idea of "extra effort" and then have that idea not come into play in any of these answer choices.

I'd be curious as to the source, the OA, and the official explanation for this question. I don't find any of these answer choices GMAT-like.