- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8310
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
Assumption. The correct answer choice is (A)
While the stimulus here covers two questions, each of the questions focuses on a specific portion of the stimulus. This question stem deals only with the statements made by the environmentalist. The main conclusion here is that the national government must regulate industry safety standards. Two premises are used to get to this conclusion. The first sentence informs us that there is a need for stricter safety standards. That statement is combined with the fact that the industry refuses to take action as support for the conclusion. In prephrasing this question, you might notice that there is a jump straight from the fact that industry will not take action to the idea that the government must do take action. So, since this is an assumption question, we have to figure out what is missing. Do we know that there is nobody else that can take action?
Answer Choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. This answer choice addresses the hole in the argument, which is not taking into consideration outside forces that might be able to take action. Using the Assumption Negation technique, the negated version of this answer would tell us that there are other effective sources of increased stringency in safety standards, thus attacking the conclusion that government must do it since the industry will not.
Answer Choice (B): While this answer choice may strengthen the idea that oil companies should be forced to put double hulls on their tankers, it is definitely not necessary for the conclusion to be true.
Answer Choice (C): While the environmentalist may agree with this statement if it would make the tankers safer, it is not necessary for the conclusion to be true.
Answer Choice (D): This answer choice is completely irrelevant to the environmentalist's argument and does not affect the stimulus in any way.
Answer Choice (E): Once again, the environmentalist would probably agree with this statement and does it likely strengthens the environmentalist's overall argument. However, the environmentalist's argument still holds up logically without this information, so this is therefore not an assumption on which the argument depends.