Politician: Unless our nation redistributes wealth, we will be unable

We can draw a conclusion only from the premises according to the tenets of critical reasoning.

The very first line truthfully justifies the conclusion drawn B in that unless the country redistribute wealth, other things are not going to follow, Hence B is the correct answer. One cannot draw any other choice from the premises.

B is the answer.
_________________

Can anyone explain, why E is incorrect?

So, here is my take:

Argument: Unless wealth be redistributed, violent attempts will follow. It is our nation's responsibility to do what's necessary to alleviate violent attempts of social reform. Therefore, the politician says that wealth redistribution is nation's responsability, as it is necessary to alleviate violent attempts fo social reform.


B - can be deduced without looking at answer choices beforehand.

(E) All that is required to create conditions of economic justice is the redistribution of wealth.

Option E says all that is required is the redistribution of wealth , but according to the argument it is must to redistribute wealth,
but doesn't say redistribution is only thing that requires and this is all we need to solve this issue
..
Hope it helps
..

Sorry for my English , i am new to this.

This is a good question!:D
Ok, so I'll give my line of reasoning, which I learnt from abhimahna. Sir, you rock!!
So:
From the question:
1. Let "economic equities.. " from the first line be P. Let the statement " Unless redistribution of wealth..." from the first line be Q. Now :
P, unless Q implies ~Q -> P , which means Redistribution of wealth-> Economic Inequities
2. Now let " If inequities become intolerable..." and "suffer from violence" be in the form of If P, then R.
3. Now the last line " It is the nations responsibility..." means that if there is violence then the nation is responsible to interfere. So :
from 1 and 2, we get ~Q -> R ,and from the last statement we get R -> responsibility .
So we end up with : the nation's responsibility to redistribute wealth. B is the answer.
For more explanation, you can refer to the use of conditional logic from abhimahna's post.
Hope it helps!

This is the flow:

~Redistribute Wealth --> ~ Alleviate Econ. Injustice --> Econ. Inequities (intolerable) --> Violence

So, if it's the nation's responsibility to avoid violence (basically negation of violence), initiate a chain of contra-positives.

~Violence --> ~ Econ. Inequities --> ~(~ Alleviate Econ. Injustice) --> ~(~Redistribute Wealth) = Nation must redistribute wealth.

The confusion may arise between B & E though. The problem here is that we typically associate the require clause to be a necessary condition, but in this case, it is the reverse. Let's think about what it is saying (E) All that is required to create conditions of economic justice is the redistribution of wealth. So, it is saying that if we redistribute wealth, we are certain to achieve economic justice. It maps to this:

Redistribute wealth --> Alleviate Econ. Injustice.

Comparing this with the original sequence, we find that E it is a case of Mistaken Negation. Hence, B.

For all Political CR Imagine yourself to be Nancy Pelosi and answer.

From Power score:

Must Be True-SN. The correct answer choice is (B)

Since this is an ordinary fact-set stimulus and not an argument, the Must Be True question requires us to put the facts together in some meaningful way and come up with a valid conclusion. One simple way to do this would be to diagram the conditional relationships between the fact-set elements:
Redistribute wealth → $ Injustice → $ Inequality → Violence
Since violence cannot be tolerated, the contrapositive chain easily leads to the conclusion that we must redistribute wealth:
Violence → $ Inequality→ $ Injustice→ Redistribute wealth
Answer choice (B) is therefore correct.

Answer choice (A): At issue is not whether violence is justified or not, but rather what can be done to prevent violence. This answer choice misses the point and is incorrect.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. See discussion above.

Answer choice (C): Given that the author herself adopts an abstract moral principle in the last sentence of her stimulus, it is unclear why politicians should act differently. This answer choice contradicts a central premise of this argument and is therefore incorrect.

Answer choice (D): The stimulus does not suggest that the likelihood of violence is the only situation in which we need to remedy economic injustice. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (E): While not redistributing wealth necessarily leads to conditions of economic injustice, there is no guarantee that redistributing wealth is sufficient to create justice. Since wealth redistribution is a necessary but insufficient condition for justice, this answer choice is a Mistaken Reversal of the conditional chain and is therefore incorrect.

Posted from my mobile device

Legit funny😀