7895714545 wrote:
this question is not of assumption then why we negate the option
True that negation is done generally with assumption questions. But is it a hard and fast rule to do so?
There is a possibility that options might touch assumption aspect of the argument, then would not it be better to go ahead with negation.
This question can have answers that may be assumption or inference(most likely) both of which would have been true.
Red text in each of the wrong answer is the reason for its elimination.
In the recent election, a country’s voters overwhelmingly chose Adler over Burke.Voters knew that Burke offered more effective strategies for dealing with most of the country’s problems. Moreover, Burke has a long public record of successful government service that testifies to competence and commitment. It was well known, however, that Burke’s environmental policy coincided with the interests of the country’s most dangerous polluter, whereas Adler proposed a policy of strict environmental regulation.
Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the information above?
(A)
Throughout their respective political careers, Adler has been more committed to taking measures to protect the country’s environment than Burke has been.
(B) Voters realized that their country’s
natural resources are rapidly being depleted.
(C) The
concern of the country’s voters
for the environment played an important role in Adler’s election.
(D)
Offering effective strategies for dealing with a country’s problems is more important in winning an election than having a long record of successful government service. (E) In
every respect other than environmental policy, Burke
would have served the country better than Adler will.
I hope you get the point.
_________________
Pain + Reflection = Progress | Ray Dalio
Good Books to read prior to MBA