An examination of corruption provides the basis for rejecting the view that an exact science of society can ever
be constructed. As with all other social phenomena that involve deliberate secrecy, it is intrinsically impossible to
measure corruption, and this is not merely due to the fact that social science has not yet reached its goal, achievable
to be sure, of developing adequate quantifying techniques. If people were ready to answer question about their
embezzlements and bribes, it would mean that these practices had acquired the character of legitimate, taxable
activities and had ceased to be corrupt. In other words, corruption must disappear if it is to be measurable.

Which one of the following most accurately states a hidden assumption that the author must make in order to
advance the argument above?

(A) Some people believe that an exact science of society can be constructed.
(B) The primary purpose of an exact science to quantify and measure phenomena.
(C) An intrinsic characteristic of social phenomena that involve deliberate secrecy is that they cannot be measured.
(D) An exact science of social phenomena that involve deliberate secrecy cannot be constructed.
(E) An exact science can be constructed only when the phenomena it studies can be measured

What is the issue with ?
_________________

KUDOS me if you feel my contribution has helped you.

lol... if u see a question like this be happy cause that means u are already in 770 lvl. :D

Conclusion is : exact science of society can possibly be never constructed. He then gives example of corruption, which he
points out cannot be measured.
So the assumptions is E.- An exact science can be constructed only when the phenomena it studies can be measured.

KUDOS if u like