The stable functioning of a society depends upon the relatively long-

The question is moderately hard due to the fact that most people would be confused while figuring out the conclusion of the argument. The argument starts with the sentence "The stable functioning of a society depends upon the relatively long-term stability of the goals of its citizens." which is the conclusion of the argument and the second sentence "This is clear from the fact that unless the majority of individuals have a predictable and enduring set of aspirations, it will be impossible for a legislature to craft laws that will augment the satisfaction of the citizenry, and it should be obvious that a society is stable only if its laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens." is the premise which strengthens the claim that the stable functioning of a society does depend on the long-term stability of the goals of its citizens.

The question stem asks to identify the role of the claim that "a society is stable only if its laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens."This is a part of the second sentence which is the premise and is used to support the conclusion of the argument. It says that making laws that the majority likes is essential for the satisfaction of the citizenry, and making such laws is only possible when the majority of individuals have predictable and enduring set of aspirations, that is when they have similar goals, the last part of the second sentence rephrases that a society would be considered stable only if its laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens. Hence, the role of the claim is to indirectly strengthen the conclusion of the argument. Hence, B

I understand why B can be perceived as correct, but I don't understand how E can be incorrect. Can someone please provide with an explanation for the same?

Hello Experts,

GMATNinja, gmat1393, GMATNinjaTwo, broall, nightblade354

Can you please help? I also have same doubt. I understand the rationale behind selecting Bbut cannot understand why E is wrong.

Regards,
Arup

DmitryFarber Thanks for the response. So option E is wrong because the statement is not an illustration of any general principle but rather a general principle itself.


Regards,
Arup.

Please explain why B is correct and why D is not correct

The stable functioning of a society depends upon the relatively long-term stability of the goals of its citizens. This is clear from the fact that unless the majority of individuals have a predictable and enduring set of aspirations, it will be impossible for a legislature to craft laws that will augment the satisfaction of the citizenry, and it should be obvious that a society is stable only if its laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens.

P: This is clear from the fact that unless the majority of individuals have a predictable and enduring set of aspirations, it will be impossible for a legislature to craft laws that will augment the satisfaction of the citizenry
P: A society is stable only if its laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens
C: The stable functioning of a society depends upon the relatively long-term stability of the goals of its citizens

Diagram: majority of individuals have a predictable and enduring set of aspirations --> will be impossible for a legislature to craft laws that will augment the satisfaction of the citizenry --> Society Stable

Society Stable --> Laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens

Easy-ish set up, but the answer choices makes this a challenging question: We are told a function of society, and then told a requirement that needs to be fulfilled for society to achieve this goal. Given we know the above is a premise because it supports the requirement of a functioning society (our argument), we can go into the answer choices looking for something that says "premise" or "supports the conclusion".

The claim that a society is stable only if its laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens plays which one of the following roles in the argument?

(A) It is the conclusion of the argument -- Nope. The conclusion has to be supported by at least one premise, and this statement isn't supported; it supports.

(B) It helps to support the conclusion of the argument -- Bingo! It supports (a premise) the argument. This is word for word what we are looking for!

(C) It is a claim that must be refuted if the conclusion is to be established -- Opposite of this. It is a claim that needs to be true to make the argument complete (otherwise we are assuming unhappiness means an inability to have stable governance).

(D) It is a consequence of the argument -- A consequence is an outcome. I define this as a conclusion, but is it an outcome? Is it a conclusion? The answer is simply no.

(E) It is used to illustrate the general principle that the argument presupposes -- The trickiest answer simply because you have to parse out the language to understand what is being stated. Let's break it down: It is used to illustrate the general principle (Society Stable --> Laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens -- this is a premise. This is not an example of a general principle of the argument because it is an example of the physical argument); that the argument presupposes (this is saying that the argument assumes this) -- well, I highlighted above that we would've needed to assume this if we didn't state it, but the argument isn't forcing us to assume anything for the argument to be correct. Further, combining the above, we are saying that the stated portion is a principle being assumed. This is completely illogical and doesn't make sense, especially because it is a stated premise!

Hi nightblade354, I still am having trouble understanding how A is wrong.

My thought process: Because "The stable functioning of a society depends upon the relatively long-term stability of the goals of its citizens", Therefore "A society is stable only if its laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens". Long-term stability of goals --drives--> happiness. It doesn't appear to work the other way around.

Please advise. Thanks

Hi

Answer option (D) states: It is a consequence of the argument.

Consequence means result ie; the claim is the result of the argument. Let us identify the argument ie; the conclusion of the stimulus. It is clearly the first sentence:

The stable functioning of a society depends upon the relatively long-term stability of the goals of its citizens.

The rest of the stimulus presents premises and other statements aimed at proving this conclusion. Therefore, as per option (D), the claim mentioned in the questioned should be a direct result of the conclusion. So we ask the question: Is this true?

The stable functioning of a society depends upon the relatively long-term stability of the goals of its citizens --> A society is stable only if its laws tend to increase the happiness of its citizens

The answer is clearly No. The second statement is used to support the first statement and not vice versa. Hence option (D) is incorrect.

Hope this clatifies.

My question is, how does B) "support" the conclusion.

I wasn't a fan of E either because of the word 'illustrate' as I don't think it's illustrating anything.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.