The argument has two clauses.

Let X be "Max were guilty"

and Y be "asking the police to investigate"

So the logical structure of the argument is:

If X then not Y. Therefore if Y then not X.

We need to find out which is closest to above structure.

(A) If Lucille were in the next room, I would not be able to see her. Therefore, the fact that I can see her shows that she is not in the next room.

-Correct.

Structure: If X then not Y. Therefore if Y then not X.(B) If Sam were rich, he would not spend his vacation in Alaska. Therefore, his spending his vacation in the Bahamas shows that he is rich.

Different Structure: If X then not Y. Therefore if Z then not X.

I'm taking Z here since there is a shift from Alaska to Bahamas.(C) If Joe were over 40 he would not want to learn to ski. Therefore, the fact that he does not want to learn to ski shows that he is over 40.

Different structure. If X then not Y. Therefore not Y means X.(D) If Mark were a good cook, he would not put cinnamon in the chili. Therefore, the fact that he is not a good cook shows that he put cinnamon in the chili.

Different structure. If X then not Y. Therefore not X means Y.(E) If Sally were sociable, she would not avoid her friends. Therefore, the fact that she is sociable shows that she does not avoid her friends.

Different structure. If X then not Y. Therefore X means not Y.
_________________

ISB 2011-12 thread | Ask ISB Alumni @ ThinkISB

All information related to Indian candidates and B-schools | Indian B-schools accepting GMAT scores

Self evaluation for Why MBA?