Quote:
The whimsical nature of the Monolothians of Middle Eastern history was thought to result from eating the narcotic in the cacao plant. But modern research with hamsters has shown that the smell of the cacao produces the lighthearted, dreamy condition that identified the cacao-eaters.
This statement assumes that
(A) it is the fragrance of the cacao that is addictive rather than the narcotic
(B) the fragrance of the cacao enhances the narcotic effect
(C) hamsters and humans are affected by the cacao fragrance in the same way
(D) the effect produced by eating the cacao is greater than that produced by smelling it
(E) eating the narcotic in the cacao has no effect on people
The right answer here is
C. With 'find the assumption' questions, the trick is to identify the conclusion, the primary statement that conclusion is based on, before diving into the options. The assumption that you will then find should be something that bridges a gap between the two. In this case, the conclusion is that it is actually the smell of cacao that causes the psychedelic effect. This conclusion has been arrived at based on research with hamsters. Clearly the gap here is that hamsters and people are different, so we can expect our assumption to address that.
A - This is actually the conclusion itself, not an assumption.
OUTB - This is not necessary to get to the conclusion, it is just add-on information that doesn't impact the argument.
OUTC - This makes the link between hamsters and humans correctly!
CORRECTD - If anything, this would actually detract from our conclusion.
OUTE - This still doesn't explain the smell, nor does it explain the hamsters.
OUT - Matoo