Q20 - Politician: Homelessness is a serious

[b91302310]

Hi,

Could anyone explain why (E) is incorrect in this question?

Thanks!

[bbirdwell]

(E) is incorrect because that statement is not required. One could merely begin the argument with "Further government spending to provide low-income housing is not the cure for homelessness."

It's merely an introductory phrase. Consider an example:

Lebron James is an amazing player, but the Heat should not have signed him.

It's totally fine to cut out the first phrase, because it is not essential to the conclusion: "The Heat should not have signed Lebron James."

[SchneiderME01]

So that's why E is the wrong answer.

So can we expand on that and explain why D is a wrong answer and why C is the right answer?

Thanks for the help!

[timmydoeslsat]

So we are to describe the role played in the argument by the phrase "Homelessness is a serious social problem."

When doing questions like these, I would bracket the phrase in question as well as the conclusion of the argument (if the two happen to be different).

In this argument, our conclusion is that further government spending to provide low-income housing is not the cure for homelessness.

The rest of sentences in the argument support that idea. The last sentence of this stimulus is an intermediate conclusion, which is a conclusion reached on a piece of evidence, and that conclusion is used to support the main conclusion of the argument.

As Brian said above, this claim in question is consistent with either accepting or denying the conclusion. This is a fact that is being stated and nothing in this argument is attacking that idea.

This argument is not trying to discredit the idea that homelessness is a serious social problem. Instead, it is concluding that one way of combating the problem is not the panacea or cure for it.

[bbirdwell]

Right. We could see the argument like this:

C: gov. spending on housing not cure for homelessness
p: no lack of housing

The part saying "homelessness is a serious problem" is just a fact. It doesn't play a major functional role in the argument (it is neither a conclusion nor a premise).

(A) no, it's not an alternative to the perspective regarding government spending.

(B) the test-writers are trying to lure us in with the word "problem" here. The argument does NOT try to resolve this problem; the argument is concerned only with rejecting one potential solution to the problem.

(C) this is true: whether or not the author is correct regarding government spending, homelessness can be a serious problem.

(D) no - the argument is designed to discredit the contention that the government should fund low-income housing.

(E) is untrue. Maybe homelessness is NOT a "serious" problem. The conclusion would still stand.