broall wrote:
Lucien: Public-housing advocates claim that the many homeless people in this city are proof that there is insufficient housing available to them and therefore that more low-income apartments are needed. But that conclusion is absurd. Many apartments in my own building remain unrented and my professional colleagues report similar vacancies where they live. Since apartments clearly are available, homelessness is not a housing problem. Homelessness can, therefore, only be caused by people’s inability or unwillingness to work to pay the rent.
Maria: On the contrary, all recent studies show that a significant percentage of this city’s homeless people hold regular jobs. These are people who lack neither will nor ability.
Lucien’s argument against the public-housing advocates’ position is most vulnerable to which one of the following criticisms?
(A) It offers no justification for dismissing as absurd the housing advocates’ claim that there are many homeless people in the city.
(B) It treats information acquired through informal conversations as though it provided evidence as strong as information acquired on the basis of controlled scientific studies.
(C) It responds to a claim in which “available” is used in the sense of “affordable” by using “available” in the sense of “not occupied.”
(D) It overlooks the possibility that not all apartment buildings have vacant apartments for rent.
(E) It fails to address the issue, raised by the public-housing advocates’ argument, of who would pay for the construction of more low-income housing.
Source: LSAT
Same passage with different stem question:
LINK Option a : Lucien's argument never counters the advocates argument regarding the NUMBER of homeless people. His argument is concerned with "availability" of housing. You can infer this from the premise, "Since apartments clearly are available, homelessness is not a housing problem". ELIMINATE
Option b : First of all, we cannot definitely say that Lucien's conversation with his colleges is formal or informal. Moreover, he never treats this information to be as concrete as controlled scientific studies. ELIMINATE
Option c : We can infer that what Public-housing advocates meant when they said "insufficient housing available" from their recommendation of more low income apartments. The advocates used the word "available" in the context of "affordable". Whereas, Lucien's argument talked about availability in its literal sense by stating that many houses around him are empty. CORRECT
Option d : Lucien said that "Since apartments clearly are available". He never claimed that ALL apartments are available. ELIMINATE
Option e : The cost of construction is not discussed in the argument. Out of scope. ELIMINATE
Answer: C