- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8926
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:00 am
#35299
Complete Question Explanation
Must Be True—SN. The correct answer choice is (D)
The stimulus presents a fact set driven by conditional reasoning. Applying the Unless Equation to the last sentence, the phrase modified by “unless” becomes the necessary condition, whereas the remainder is negated and becomes the sufficient condition:
Although the relationships described also contain elements of causation (“this will result in…”), the language in the second sentence suggests an inevitable, absolute outcome typical of a conditional relationship. Additionally, the causal reasoning in stimuli containing fact sets does not warrant the same level of scrutiny as does the conditional reasoning in them, especially when the latter suggests the presence of chain relationships (as is the case here).
Answer choice (A): The information contained in the stimulus cannot help us determine whether most of the city’s residents will continue to recycle after the sorting requirement is implemented. All we know is that many of them will put more recyclables in with their regular garbage. What proportion of residents continue to recycle is entirely unknown.
Answer choice (B): We cannot be certain if all of the city’s residents who recycle will actually comply with the sorting requirement, if implemented.
Answer choice (C): Granted, the annual cost of sorting recyclables is likely to decrease after the new sorting requirement is implemented, while the cost of sending garbage to the landfill will probably increase. However, we do not know the relative value of these two costs before the new requirement is implemented, which means that we cannot calculate their relative value after. It is entirely possible, for instance, that the annual cost of sending garbage to the landfill already exceeds the current cost of sorting recyclables.
If the sanitation department is to stay within budget, there is only one conclusion we can draw (assuming all other costs and revenues remain constant): the added cost of sending garbage to the landfill cannot exceed the savings that would result from not having city workers do the sorting.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice, as it matches the additive inference of the chain relationship outlined above:
Must Be True—SN. The correct answer choice is (D)
The stimulus presents a fact set driven by conditional reasoning. Applying the Unless Equation to the last sentence, the phrase modified by “unless” becomes the necessary condition, whereas the remainder is negated and becomes the sufficient condition:
- Sorting = Sorting requirement
GR = Garbage recyclables
LR = Landfill recyclables
Budget = Sanitation department stays within budget
Statement (1):
Sorting 
Increase GR
Statement (2): Increase GR Increase LR
Statement (2): Budget Sorting
- Budget Sorting Increase GR Increase LR
Although the relationships described also contain elements of causation (“this will result in…”), the language in the second sentence suggests an inevitable, absolute outcome typical of a conditional relationship. Additionally, the causal reasoning in stimuli containing fact sets does not warrant the same level of scrutiny as does the conditional reasoning in them, especially when the latter suggests the presence of chain relationships (as is the case here).
Answer choice (A): The information contained in the stimulus cannot help us determine whether most of the city’s residents will continue to recycle after the sorting requirement is implemented. All we know is that many of them will put more recyclables in with their regular garbage. What proportion of residents continue to recycle is entirely unknown.
Answer choice (B): We cannot be certain if all of the city’s residents who recycle will actually comply with the sorting requirement, if implemented.
Answer choice (C): Granted, the annual cost of sorting recyclables is likely to decrease after the new sorting requirement is implemented, while the cost of sending garbage to the landfill will probably increase. However, we do not know the relative value of these two costs before the new requirement is implemented, which means that we cannot calculate their relative value after. It is entirely possible, for instance, that the annual cost of sending garbage to the landfill already exceeds the current cost of sorting recyclables.
If the sanitation department is to stay within budget, there is only one conclusion we can draw (assuming all other costs and revenues remain constant): the added cost of sending garbage to the landfill cannot exceed the savings that would result from not having city workers do the sorting.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice, as it matches the additive inference of the chain relationship outlined above:
- Budget Increase LR
- Sorting Budget
