The town council of North Tarrytown favored changing the name of the t

With Critical Reasoning, we'll want to start by reading the question so that we can identify how we're being tested. In this case, we have an assumption question, so we're looking for the answer choice that must be true to connect the dots between evidence and conclusion.

If council members argue that changing the name would result in immediate financial benefits for the town's inhabitants, we want the answer that - if false - would completely deteriorate the logic of the argument.

A. most of the inhabitants would favor a change in the name of the town <- In this case, it doesn't really matter to us how the inhabitants feel about the change, we're arguing that the change, if implemented, would yield immediate financial benefits. Could be true, could be false, not an assumption.

B. many inhabitants would be ready to supply tourists with information about Washington Irving and his “legend” <- Again, could be true or false, so it's not an assumption.

C. the town can accomplish, at a very low cost per capita, the improvements in tourist facilities that an increase in tourism would require <- Whether they are at capacity to make inexpensive improvements doesn't make or break our argument. This could still be false and, in a number of ways, the argument could still hold true.

D. other towns in the region have changed their names to reflect historical associations and have, as a result, experienced a rise in tourism <- This is a common trap answer that doesn't make or break our argument. Whether or not this has been successful for other towns does not have to be the case for this particular instance to work.

E. the immediate per capita cost to inhabitants of changing the name of the town would be less than the immediate per capita revenue they would receive from the change <- Here we are! If this were untrue, or if "the immediate per capita cost to inhabitants of changing the name of the town would not be less than the immediate per capita revenue they would receive from the change," this completely destroys our argument, as we need revenue to outweigh costs to inhabitants in order to conclude that the change would yield "immediate financial benefits." E is our answer.

Assumption negation, and testing answers to the statement "does this have to be true for the argument to be valid" will aid us in using process of elimination to arrive at the correct answer and weed out convincing wrong answers that may strengthen, or impact the argument otherwise, but don't have to be true for the argument to be valid.

Hope this helps!
_________________

Use the Negation technique for Assumption questions. If we negate an answer choice and it completely wrecks the argument, then that is the correct answer.



The immediate cost would be more than the immediate revenue?

That would not result in immediate financial benefit for the town's inhabitants.

Answer: E

Assumption: Inhabitants will receive immediate financial benefits.
Answer E: For such assumption to be true immediate revenue must outweigh immediate costs

Thank you! Very well explained.,

The town council of North Tarrytown favored changing the name of the town to Sleepy Hollow. Council members argued that making the town's association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would increase tourism and result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants.

The council members' argument requires the assumption that

A. most of the inhabitants would favor a change in the name of the town
B. many inhabitants would be ready to supply tourists with information about Washington Irving and his “legend”
C. the town can accomplish, at a very low cost per capita, the improvements in tourist facilities that an increase in tourism would require
D. other towns in the region have changed their names to reflect historical associations and have, as a result, experienced a rise in tourism
E. the immediate per capita cost to inhabitants of changing the name of the town would be less than the immediate per capita revenue they would receive from the change(Correct)

Hey VeritasPrepHailey,

Thank you for such a concise and pointed explanation. I have a query regarding negating/ falsifying Option (D)

Option D: other towns in the region have changed their names to reflect historical associations and have, as a result, experienced a rise in tourism

Negation 1: other towns in the region have not changed their names to reflect historical associations and have, as a result, experienced a rise in tourism

Negation 2: other towns in the region have not changed their names to reflect historical associations and have not, as a result, experienced a rise in tourism

Which of the above two options is correct?

Thanks!!

D is trap but it has another reason as main argument is about financial benefits which is not addressed in option D. Therefore, option E is much better here.

AndrewN

If the option were changed from
THIS

TO


Would it be a correct answer ?

Good question, warrior1991. I would still have to say no. Although you have changed the unqualified very low cost per capita to something that better reflects the balance between cost and revenue, the placement of immediate allows for the interpretation that the answer choice is freeze-framing the financial state of the residents of the freshly christened Sleepy Hollow right now, prior to the influx of tourists. That is, there does not seem to be a guarantee that tourists will flock to the area, just that the town will be poised for that possibility. Notice how choice (E) fixes the issue by discussing the immediate per capita revenue they would receive. Don't get me wrong: I think plenty of people would choose your proposed choice (C). It is a fine-tuned trap answer, but one that does not ultimately deliver to the required end.

Thank you for seeking my opinion. I hope my response helps out.

- Andrew
_________________

Conclusion: Council members argued that making the town's association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would increase tourism and result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants. (“result IMMEDIATELY in financial benefits” – is immediately a red flag…)

The council members' argument requires the assumption that

(A) most of the inhabitants would favor a change in the name of the town
Preferences don’t matter. Out of scope.

(B) many inhabitants would be ready to supply tourists with information about Washington Irving and his “legend”
Could be seen as a strengthener, but this doesn’t bridge the gap between changing the name and resulting in immediate financial benefits.

(C) the town can accomplish, at a very low cost per capita, the improvements in tourist facilities that an increase in tourism would require
But would this result in immediate financial benefits? This could almost weaken. Even if it’s at a “very low cost,” it’s still a cost. What if there isn’t ANY increase in tourism.

(D) other towns in the region have changed their names to reflect historical associations and have, as a result, experienced a rise in tourism
Out of scope – we don’t care about the comparison between other towns. This option seems to come up frequently in incorrect choices.

(E) the immediate per capita cost to inhabitants of changing the name of the town would be less than the immediate per capita revenue they would receive from the change
This is it. This bridges the gap between changing name and immediate $$. How do we know that we could gain immediate $$? Because the initial $ is LESS than the $ that would be received from the change.

Hi Hailey,

I ended up choosing the wrong conclusion.

The town council of North Tarrytown favored changing the name of the town to Sleepy Hollow. Council members argued that making the town's association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would increase tourism and result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants.

I was thinking the "The town council of North Tarrytown favored changing the name of the town to Sleepy Hollow BECAUSE OF Council members argued that making the town's association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would increase tourism and result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants."

So if we use the therefore test, the first sentence is the conclusion because the second sentence states the reason.
Could you please guide me on why the second sentence was the conclusion ?

Thank you.

why B is incorrect, if many inhabitant are not willing to share information then the tourism will not flourish right. Because people will come to this city to know about this legend , but if they don't get know about the it, the tourism will not flourish . Am i wrong

The town council of North Tarrytown favored changing the name of the town to Sleepy Hollow.
The council of a town wanted to change the name of the town.

Council members argued that making the town’s association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would increase tourism and result immediately in financial benefits for the town’s inhabitants.
This statement gives us the reason for why the council wishes to change the name.

1. The town has an association with an author and his famous story (I have brought in my real-world understanding here. I know “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow” is a published story.)
2. Naming the town Sleepy Hollow will make the connection between the town and the famous legend more obvious.
3. This will increase tourism.
4. As a result, the town’s inhabitants will get immediate financial benefits.

The council members’ argument requires the assumption that

Well, the council members have made a prediction.
Let’s make the connection between our town and that story more obvious. Doing that will:

1. Increase tourism
2. And result immediately in financial benefits for the residents

As is the case with all predictions, there are inherent assumptions.

E.g. I will write another CR solution tomorrow.
I assume that nothing will happen that would prevent me from writing another CR solution tomorrow. E.g. What if some urgent family matter comes up that I need to tend to immediately and for the entire day? In that case I’ll not be able to write another CR solution tomorrow.

Here too, the council assumes that

1. Tourism will certainly increase (e.g. what if a pandemic strikes, and all travel is banned?)
2. The residents will get immediate financial benefits (the word “immediate” stands out for me. E.g. What if initially there are certain capital expenditures, such as furniture and appliances, because of which the residents will not experience immediate profits.)

We are to look for an assumption. The correct answer choice will:

1. Support the council members’ argument
2. Be necessary for the council members’ argument

(A) most of the inhabitants would favor a change in the name of the town
Incorrect.
The argument is not about whether the name should be changed. The argument is that the name change will increase tourism and result in immediate financial benefits for the residents. This answer choice has no impact on the argument. Thus, it is not an assumption.

(B) many inhabitants would be ready to supply tourists with information about Washington Irving and his “legend”
Incorrect.
So what? Would that information lead to more revenue? I don’t see a direct relation here. To be safe, I’ll check if the statement is necessary. Is it necessary for the council members’ argument that many inhabitants do this? No. Even if they are not ready to supply the said information, the argument still stands as is.

(C) the town can accomplish, at a very low cost per capita, the improvements in tourist facilities that an increase in tourism would require
Incorrect.
This answer choice strengthens the argument. If the cost of the required improvements is low, I believe more than before that the increased tourism will lead to immediate financial benefits.
What if the per capita cost of making the required improvements is not very low (negation)? Even then, the residents could have immediate financial benefits as long as the increased revenue more than compensates for the incurred costs. Since the negation doesn’t break down the argument, this answer choice is not necessary for the argument. Thus, it is not an assumption.

(D) other towns in the region have changed their names to reflect historical associations and have, as a result, experienced a rise in tourism
Incorrect.
This answer choice mildly strengthens the council members’ argument.

I am not sure that the Washington Irving connection is a ‘historical association’. For now, I’ll consider that it is. In that case, if other towns have had similar results as the ones this town’s council predicts, I do believe a tad bit more that perhaps this town will also experience a rise in tourism.

On to the second check.

Is it necessary for the argument that other towns should have changed their names in this fashion and have experienced a rise in tourism too?
Nah! That’s not necessary.

Let’s do the same check by negating this answer choice.
What if other towns in the region have not changed their names to reflect historical associations? Or, even if they have, what if they did not experience a rise in tourism as a result?

Even in those cases, the town in question could still experience a rise in tourism after the name change. So, the argument doesn’t break down.

(E) the immediate per capita cost to inhabitants of changing the name of the town would be less than the immediate per capita revenue they would receive from the change
Correct.
Statement: For the inhabitants, the immediate cost would be less that the immediate revenue.

In that case, I do believe more than before that there will be an immediate financial benefit to the residents from the name change. This answer choice strengthens the council members’ argument.

Next, is it necessary?

What if the immediate per capita cost to inhabitants of changing the name of the town would be EQUAL TO OR MORE than the immediate per capita revenue they would receive from the change? (negation)

In that case, the inhabitants will not experience immediate benefits. Thus, the argument falls apart.

Since the answer choice supports the argument and is necessary for it, it is a required assumption.

My doubt is regarding option B. One of the assumptions I had thought of while reading the passage was that the council is assuming the tourists even know about the legend in the first place otherwise the plan of attracting tourists based on that story would not work. The connection between the legend and the tourists knowing about the legend is something the council assumed. Option B rectifies that by stating the same. However, when we read the option B, it implies that the tourists have already arrived in the town without knowing the legend itself. Do you count that as the revenue already generated or that telling the infomration about the legend may increase the revenue. If the option was written in the following way, I want to know if this could have been the answer:
A') The council implemented an online campaign to advertise and share the legend of sleepy hollow for potential tourists

If yes then could you explain the difference between A') and the original A) option? Thanks for the help!

Hi Experts, HaileyCusimano AnishPassi AndrewN

Can anyone of you please tell me the negation of the D option?

Thanks for your time.

The town council of North Tarrytown favored changing the name of the town to Sleepy Hollow. Council members argued that making the town's association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would increase tourism and result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants.

Conclusion says that the change in name would eventually result in accruing of financial benefits to the town's inhabitants by way of increase in number of tourists.

Benefit= Revenue - Expenses

The change in name would require the council to spend some money i.e. expenses.
The increase in number of tourists would lead to increase in revenue i.e. revenue.
Now, the benefit could only be possible when revenue > expenses i.e. Option E.

I understand that option E answers the question about the increase in financial benefits, but the conclusion also states that it will increase tourism.

How does E answer to increase in tourism? Although this is official question, I think the answer is 100% correct.

Hi Gijmaja,
Let me help.

The conclusion here is: Making the town's association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would increase tourism and result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants.
So, the conclusion is about these two conditions, and it will be true as long as BOTH of the following conditions are met:

1. Making the change increases tourism
2. Making the change results immediately in financial benefits of the town’s inhabitants

Since this is an Assumption question, we need to find an answer choice that:

1. Brings in new information
2. Is Must Be True, i.e., the conclusion will break if the choice is negated.

Now, your concern is that Choice E addresses the financial benefit aspect but does not talk about the tourism aspect.
My question is: Does it need to?
The answer is No.

See, a correct assumption, when negated, should break the conclusion, irrespective of whether it talks about every aspect mentioned in the conclusion or not. If Choice E breaks the conclusion when negated, it can be a correct assumption even though it does not talk about tourism. Let’s check that:
The conclusion will break if any one of the two conditions or both the given conditions are not met.
Hence, the conclusion will break if:

1. Making the town's association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would not increase tourism but result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants.
2. Making the town's association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would increase tourism but not result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants.
3. Making the town's association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would neither increase tourism nor result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants.

Now, let’s see if negated Choice E breaks the conclusion.
Negated Choice E- the immediate per capita cost to inhabitants of changing the name of the town would not be less than the immediate per capita revenue they would receive from the change.
If negated Choice E is true, then the change will not result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants. Hence, even if tourism increases, the conclusion will break.

• Hence, negated Choice E breaks the conclusion
• Also, Choice E brings in new information.

Therefore, choice E is a correct assumption.


Learning: A correct assumption, when negated, should break the conclusion. Hence, even if a choice does not address every aspect mentioned in the conclusion, it can be a correct assumption if its negated version breaks the conclusion.


Hope that helps,
Kanupriya
_________________

This is the solution I came up with:

Conc: ­Making the town's association with Washington Irving and his famous “legend” more obvious would increase tourism and result immediately in financial benefits for the town's inhabitants.

(A) Most of the inhabitants would favor a change in the name of the town - The majority/minority opinion of the town inhabitants doesn't impact the conclusion, i.e., increase in tourism and immediate financial benefits. Drop

(B) Many inhabitants would be ready to supply tourists with information about Washington Irving and his “legend” - It's good to hear that the inhabitants would be ready to supply tourists with information. This helpful nature might go hand-in-hand with the increase in toursim and even boost it. However, is it a required condition for increase in tourism and immediate financial benefits? Not really. Drop

(C) The town can accomplish, at a very low cost per capita, the improvements in tourist facilities that an increase in tourism would require - This can be paraphrased to "The cost will be low, therefore, this would be a profitable, i.e., financial benefits.". That statement only makes sense if the cost, however small or large, is lower than the revenue the tourism brings. Not necessary. Drop

(D) Other towns in the region have changed their names to reflect historical associations and have, as a result, experienced a rise in tourism. - This would be a fair strengthener if the towns share relevant characteristics, but still not a required assumption. Drop

(E) The immediate per capita cost to inhabitants of changing the name of the town would be less than the immediate per capita revenue they would receive from the change - There we go.... This would be a necessary condition for the conclusion stated. Keep­