1. Since Mayor Drabble always repays her political debts as soon as possible, she will almost certainly appoint Lee to be the new head of the arts commission. Lee has wanted that job for a long time, and Drabble owes Lee a lot for his support in the last election.
Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. Mayor Drabble has no political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.
B. There is no one to whom Mayor Drabble owes a greater political debt for support in the last election than the political debt she owes to Lee.
C. Lee is the only person to whom Mayor Drabble owes a political debt who would be willing to accept an appointment from her as the new head of the arts commission.
D. Whether Lee is qualified to head the arts commission is irrelevant to Mayor Drabble’s decision
E. The only way that Mayor Drabble can adequately repay her political debt to Lee is by appointing him to head the arts commission.
I do not think that A can be the right answer:-
Its a cause and effect reasoning....
since she pays her debt ASAP so very soon she will appoint lee as the head of commission...She owes a lot to lee for his support.
So when it is stated that she will pay her debt ASAP, It can be agreed upon that she has no longer standing but the debt of Lee i do not think can be compared to longer standing.....There is no piece of evidence presented in support of it
It is stated that she pays her debt ASAP than it can be assumed that she has no long standing debt.....but i mean how can it be said that Lee's debt is longest standing....
i do not agree to OA
E is an assumption because there many ways to pay the debt by giving favor, dollars or a promotion etc.. but since she chooses the appointment method only leaves a gap as to why she choosing only the said method.
Ther can be many assumptions drawn:
1. she repays as per person's desire.. or we can say she endeavors to repay as per the desire of presons.
But no way we can assume that Lee's debt is the debt which is longest standing in terms of time.
Since A & E are the ones causing confusion lets apply LEN to both and see which one comes out on top.
A. Mayor Drabble might have some political debt that is both of longer standing than the one she owes to Lee and could as suitably be repaid by an appointment to be the new head of the arts commission.
Now, we know tat Mayor Drabble likes to repay her debts "AS SOON AS POSSIBLE". If there were some political debt that is longer standing than the one to LEE, then Mayor Drabble would like to settle that debt before dealing with the debt with Lee because the previous debt would have been pending for a longer time. So this negation clearly kills the conclusion.
E. There may be some other way that Mayor Drabble can adequately repay her political debt to Lee other than appointing him to head the arts commission.
Very competitive. The argument only says "almost certainly". So there is a very tiny bit of uncertainity in the argument itself.
If I were the author of the statement, I could still argue saying something like : I only said almost certainly. I do acknowledge that there is a slight chance of this not happening. But I would not be able to do the same in the case of "A". Because according to A the conclusion is definitely not possible.
I think the below diagram would be able to shed some light.
a.JPG [ 8.27 KiB | Viewed 1154 times ]
Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.
Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief
GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types