Critical Reasoning

A reason Larson cannot do the assignment is that she has an unavoidable scheduling conflict. On the other hand, a reason Franks cannot do the assignment is that he does not quite have the assertiveness the task requires. So, the task must be assigned to Parker, the only supervisor in the shipping department other than Larson and Franks.

The argument depends on assuming which one of the following?
(A) Larson has the assertiveness the task requires.
(B) The task cannot be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department.
(C) Franks would be assigned the task if Franks had the assertiveness the task requires.
(D) The task cannot be assigned to anyone who has any kind of scheduling conflict.
(E) No one who is not a supervisor in the shipping department has the assertiveness this task requires.

The answer I have is D

But I think it should be B

Please reply.. I guess it is not that difficult

I am not sure whether the question is correct. What's the source?

This is the question from flash cards i copied from some source. Might not be the correct answer I just wanted to confirm whether what I think is the right answer

I am certain that D is wrong.
The correct answer should be B. Let me explain:

(A) Larson has the assertiveness the task requires.
This is the opposite of the premise. NO

(B) The task cannot be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department.
This should be the correct answer. The conclusion says that the assignment MUST BE assigned to Parker, who is the ONLY SUPERVISOR other than Larson and Franks. Hence, it must be that the task can only be given to a supervisor. YES

(C) Franks would be assigned the task if Franks had the assertiveness the task requires.
The premise says "A reason Franks cannot do the assignment" which means that there is a possibility of more than one. It is not certain that Franks would be assigned the task even if the task required. NO

(D) The task cannot be assigned to anyone who has any kind of scheduling conflict.
This one is too broad for the scope. The premise talks about "an unavoidable scheduling conflict" while this one broadens the scope with "any kind of scheduling conflict"

(E) No one who is not a supervisor in the shipping department has the assertiveness this task requires.
Someone may have the assertiveness, we don't know, but important thing is being a supervisor here. hence NO.

Let me know if this helps

My answer is B .

A Out of Scope. Also if L has the assertiveness then why should the task be assigned to P
C Author already stated that F doesn't have the assertiveness thats required to do this task. then why would he/she assume hypothetical things.
Irrelevant.
D Exaggerated. Author only talks about unavoidable conflicts. this statements talks about any kind of conflict. what if its an avoidable conflict.
E It can still be assigned to someone in other departments. This does not explain why it must be assigned to P.

negation of choice (B): The task can be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department. ...if such is this case, the argument falls apart (goes against the conclusion). Therefore (B) should be correct.



hope this helps!