Until he was dismissed amid great controversy, Hastings was considered

Question

Until he was dismissed amid great controversy, Hastings was considered one of the greatest intelligence agents of all time. It is clear that if his dismissal was justified, then Hastings was either incompetent or else disloyal. Soon after the dismissal, however, it was shown that he had never been incompetent. Thus, one is forced to conclude that Hastings must have been disloyal.

Which one of the following states an assumption upon which the argument depends?

(A) Hastings's dismissal was justified.
(B) Hastings was a high-ranking intelligence officer.
(C) The dismissal of anyone who was disloyal would be justified.
(D) Anyone whose dismissal was justified was disloyal.
(E) If someone was disloyal or incompetent, then his dismissal was justified.

push12345 · Accepted Answer

Argument says "It is clear that if his dismissal was justified, then Hastings was either incompetent or else disloyal"

But reverse is not true. i.e. if he is disloyal or incompetent we can't say his dismissal is justified so E out

Argument concludes that he is not incompetent so he must be disloyal ,it simply infers that argument assumes that his dismissal is justified because without this the rest of passage will fall apart

So A is answer

B-irrelevant

C and D - quite extreme ,we cannot make such claim

Give kudos if it helps

Posted from my mobile device

sobby · Answer

A is the best choice .. to consider incompetency or loyalty valid scenario for dismissal, we need to assume that hastings's dismissal was justified..

duttarupam2344 · Answer

Until he was dismissed amid great controversy, Hastings was considered one of the greatest intelligence agents of all time. It is clear that if his dismissal was justified, then Hastings was either incompetent or else disloyal. Soon after the dismissal, however, it was shown that he had never been incompetent. Thus, one is forced to conclude that Hastings must have been disloyal.

Which one of the following states an assumption upon which the argument depends?

In my opinion, "one is forced to conclude" is the conclusion and not "Hastings must have been disloyal".
 
(A) Hastings's dismissal was justified.
 Best Answer. If it was not so, people could conclude in different ways.  
(B) Hastings was a high-ranking intelligence officer.
 Irrelevant statement. 
(C) The dismissal of anyone who was disloyal would be justified.
 Does not necessarily mean if someone's dismissal is justified, he / she would be disloyal. 
(D) Anyone whose dismissal was justified was disloyal.
 One can not conclude unless it is known whether the dismissal was justified. 
(E) If someone was disloyal or incompetent, then his dismissal was justified
 Same explanation as B, contradicts with the stimulus.

manjot123 · Answer

to reject e 
if----then
in e its 
reverse which may or may not be true.

nsdl1985 · Answer

Explanation:
(A) Hastings's dismissal was justified. 
 Best choice- Negate the same- Conclusion will fall apart.
 
(B) Hastings was a high-ranking intelligence officer.
 He was considered greatest intelligence office. This is not equivalent to high ranking officer. Also his high ranking does not create any impact on conclusion.
 
(C) The dismissal of anyone who was disloyal would be justified.
 We are not concerned with 'Anyone' We are concerned with Hastings/Intelligence Agents. Also what happens to anyone who is disloyal is not the subject matter. We need to see if Hasting's dismissal is justified and if yes then we can conclude he was disloyal.
 
(D) Anyone whose dismissal was justified was disloyal.
 Again not concerned with anyone. We are talking about Hasting/Intelligence Agents.
 
(E) If someone was disloyal or incompetent, then his dismissal was justified. 
 Same explanation as C & D

ashutosh_73 · Answer

Needs to be verified by experts:

Question:  Sufficient Assumption

Stimulus breakdown:

Premise 1: ~ False info ---> ~ reveal identity
Premise 2: Ordered by judge/editor ---> reveal identity
Conclusion: information concerns safety violations at the power plant ---> reveal identity even if info. is accurate

There seems a GAP between Prem-2 and conclusion. Premise 1 needs to be ignored, because conditionality of conclusion mentions that identity will be revealed even if the info. is true.

(A) The information that the informant provided is known to be false.
 Does't connect to the conclusion, which mentions reveal ''even if the info is true. 
(B) The journalist's editor will not order her to reveal the informant's identity unless the information is accurate and concerns public safety.
~ information accurate and concerns public safety ---> ~ order her to reveal. 
Contra positive: order her to reveal ---> information accurate and concerns public safety
this seems to against the argument
(C) If the information concerns safety at the power plant, a judge will order the journalist to reveal her informant's identity.
This connects the Premise 2 & conclusion well:
  info. safety at the power plant ---> Judge order ---> reveal info  
(D) The truth of the information provided by the informant can be verified only if the informant's identity is publicly revealed.
verification of truth has nothing to do with the argument
(E) The informant understood, at the time the journalist promised him confidentiality, that she would break this promise if ordered to do so by a judge.
Just a restatement of premise 2, gives us nothing about the conclusion.

Also, if an argument says: 
~ info false ---> prosecuted
can i read it as: True ---> prosecuted? 
Is it advisable to reverse the logical statements this way? I read somewhere that we shouldn't.

Thanks
ASHUTOSH

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Until he was dismissed amid great controversy, Hastings was considered

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Until he was dismissed amid great controversy, Hastings was considered

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards