Fun question, definitely a challenge.
As people seem to have noted, the 3 key options are C D and E. A and B are more simple to eliminate, here is my logic focusing on those thee possibilities.
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. So overall, argument is that 'an exact science of society can (n)ever be constructed'.
BECAUSE, you can never measure corruption, because people will never tell you about it.
Complex passage, but basically it's saying that
Which one of the following most accurately states a hidden assumption that the author must make in order to
advance the argument above? So we need an 'assumption'. This sentence again is wordy, but basically it's asking 'what assumption does the author make
(C) An intrinsic characteristic of social phenomena that involve deliberate secrecy is that they cannot be measured. Rather than an assumption this is a re-statement of the passage ' As with all other social phenomena that involve deliberate secrecy, it is intrinsically impossible to
(D) An exact science of social phenomena that involve deliberate secrecy cannot be constructed. Again this is a re-statement of the passage, 'As with all other social phenomena that involve deliberate secrecy, it is intrinsically impossible to
measure corruption, '
(E) An exact science can be constructed only when the phenomena it studies can be measured Correct! It never actually says you need to 'measure' something, but without assuming this you can not hold the conclusion
Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0
... and more