ayushgmatclub1 wrote:
VeritasKarishma GMATNinjafor option C we can say - so what if it's the only company in THIS area, govt can order from some other area
then for option D also can't we say - so what if it's difficult to obtain parts, at least it is still possible
for option E it states that the only available parts are also of very low quality and hence they can't be used. so isn't option E most relevant?
please help.
thanks
Let’s consider the logic of the argument:
- The author concludes that, assuming the newspaper is correct, the public will be safer.
- He/she supports this because the newspaper claims that public safety will be enhanced “if new sirens were to be installed.”
- The government will purchase/install new sirens if replacement parts are difficult to obtain.
- And the company that sold replacement parts last year went out of business.
Underlying the argument is the author’s belief that new sirens will be installed. He/she think this because of the government’s criteria for purchasing new sirens: whether replacements are difficult to obtain. But we don’t actually know that. All we know is that the company that sold replacement parts last year has gone out of business. Does this mean that replacement parts will be difficult to obtain? Maybe. The author seems to think so, but he/she never explicitly states why.
With that in mind, the question asks that we find an assumption which, if drawn, ensures the conclusion follows logically from its premises.
Let’s take a look at (C):
Quote:
(C) The local company from which replacement parts for the old sirens were purchased last year was the only company in the area that sold them.
(C) suggests that the replacement parts can’t be purchased locally, but they COULD still be purchased from another area. The problem is that we still don’t know whether parts purchased from other areas are
difficult to obtain. It’s possible that the parts, even though they are not local, are NOT difficult to obtain. If that’s the case, the government will purchase replacement parts rather than new sirens, and the public will not necessarily be safer in the future. So, we can eliminate (C).
Quote:
(D) Replacement parts for the old sirens will be difficult to obtain if the government cannot obtain them from the company it purchased them from last year.
The passage has established that the government cannot obtain replacement parts from the same company as last year. That, in addition to what is given in (D), means that replacement parts will be difficult to obtain. If replacement parts are difficult to obtain, then the government will purchase/install new sirens. And if the newspaper is correct, new sirens mean the public will be safer. So, (D) logically leads to the conclusion drawn by the passage. Let’s keep (D).
Quote:
(E) Because the local company from which replacement parts had been purchased went out of business, the only available parts are of such inferior quality that use of them would make the sirens less reliable.
The government’s criteria for deciding whether to replace parts or purchase new sirens is not whether the parts are of equal or greater quality to existing parts. Rather, the criteria is whether the parts are difficult to obtain. Even if the replacement parts are of inferior quality, the government could still purchase those inferior parts as long as they are not difficult to obtain. So, (E) does not necessarily ensure that new sirens will be purchased, and we can eliminate it.
(D) is the only answer choice remaining, and it is correct.
I hope that helps!
close
12 Jan 2020, 12:00
55%
(02:26)
wrong 
