Q23 - Politician: Nobody can deny that

[wayne_palmer10]

I believe that this is a strengthen question. The sufficient and necessary terms in the answer choices threw me off a bit. I think that "only if" introduces a necessary condition, but I'm not sure why (C) is correct.

[aileenann]

I believe that this is a strengthen question. The sufficient and necessary terms in the answer choices threw me off a bit. I think that "only if" introduces a necessary condition, but I'm not sure why (C) is correct.

I agree that this seems to be a strengthen problem. I think our conclusion here is "we should raise taxes." We should look at the answer choices keeping this in mind.

(A) & (B) get it wrong because they impose too stringent/narrow a requirement. We don't really know whether increased taxes are the *only* way to fix the problem - we only know that they form part of *one* way to fix the problem of homelessness.

(C) closes the gap between the last two sentences in the argument. First the author tells us that to fix homelessness, gov't will need to step in with some pricey measures. Then the author concludes that we will need to raise taxes to get the money for those pricey measures. I think it's most apparent how (C) closes this gap if you just mentally insert it between those two sentences and read the argument again - it's a gap-filling premise that makes the whole argument more coherent and makes true one of the underlying assumptions of the argument.

(D) & (E) use sufficiency, whereas the logical premise of the argument is that taxes are not sufficient but more than that - that they are necessary. Therefore we should stick with the logically significant word of necessary, another reason why (C) makes a better answer choice.

[skapur777]

With regards to your explanation of A, it says only if a measure is required to solve a problem should it be adopted. I thought the problem was that it is too stringent on the fact that "only if something is necessary should it be adopted", discounting the idea that if something was sufficient to solve a problem then it shouldn't be adopted.

and C is correct because it merely says if something is required, then they should adopt it...because if it needs to be adopted to solve a problem...then they have to do it.

Is that still a correct way of looking at this?

[timmydoeslsat]

With regards to your explanation of A, it says only if a measure is required to solve a problem should it be adopted. I thought the problem was that it is too stringent on the fact that "only if something is necessary should it be adopted", discounting the idea that if something was sufficient to solve a problem then it shouldn't be adopted.

and C is correct because it merely says if something is required, then they should adopt it...because if it needs to be adopted to solve a problem...then they have to do it.

Is that still a correct way of looking at this?

I just did this section.

This is a question stem that wants a principle to strengthen (support) the politician's argument.

The stimulus is:

Homelessness disappears ---> Govt steps in and provides the homeless with housing ---> Increased Taxation

Therefore, we should raise taxes. (another way of saying increased taxation)


Answer choices:

A) This would do us no good.

Measure should be adopted ---> Measure is required to solve a problem

This is giving us a sufficient condition of measure should be adopted! We want to be able to reason to that point, not to have it as a sufficient condition.


B) Same problem as (A). It gives us measure should be adopted as the sufficient condition. To make this answer choice even more wrong it states that if the measure is sufficient to solve it. We are told that it is necessary (required) to solve the homelessness problem.


C) Exactly what we want.

Measure is required to solve a problem ---> then it should be adopted

The measure being required is taxation, and according to this principle, the politician could validly give the conclusion of "should raise taxes."


D) The measure is necessary, not sufficient to solve a problem.

E) Again not sufficient.

[MensaNumber]

I can see why A is a wrong answer in terms of formal logic. But I have hard time seeing it intuitively. How to develop intuitive sense for 'IF' and 'Only If' conditions? Thanks!

[tommywallach]

Hey Mensa,

Apologies if I already wrote to you, but just wanted to let you know that expert/geeks don't respond to orange posts (people who haven't bought a book or a class), so at the moment you'll be waiting on other forumgoers. Just wanted to let you know. Happy forum-ing!

-t