In a theocracy, politicians not only have to understand the laws

Question

In a theocracy, politicians not only have to understand the laws of the land, but also the edicts of the god(s) or religion that their society follows. This type of understanding is difﬁcult because it combines secular knowledge with the requisite of a more abstract and spiritual knowledge. Many people cannot adequately fulﬁll this dual requirement, which is why there are fewer total politicians in all the theocratic governments throughout the world than in all the democratic governments.

For the argument to be logically correct, it must make which of the following assumptions? 
(A) There are not more democratic nations than theocratic nations in the world. 
(B) Theocratic politicians need to assess the spirituality of their polity when making decisions. 
(C) Theocratic nations satisfy the needs of their people better by using fewer politicians. 
(D) Democratic nations require a larger number of politicians on average due to the numerous factions that their politicians represent. 
(E) The edicts of any sort of god are not knowable or understandable as they apply to politics.

anuj04 · Answer

Conclusion: "Many people cannot adequately fulﬁll this dual requirement, which is why there are fewer total politicians in all the theocratic governments throughout the world than in all the democratic governments."

To make this conclusion logical, we need to know whether fewer politicians are because of complexity of Theocracy or of some other reasons.
Only A.claryfy this logic.

A is the answer

Posted from my mobile device

Pari28 · Answer

How does it matter how many democratic nations exists ?? Are we assuming that a person belonging to Country X can serve as a Politician (or elected representative) of Country Y ??

AdityaHongunti · Answer

In a theocracy, politicians not only have to understand the laws of the land, but also the edicts of the god(s) or religion that their society follows. This type of understanding is difﬁcult because it combines secular knowledge with the requisite of a more abstract and spiritual knowledge. Many people cannot adequately fulﬁll this dual requirement, which is why there are fewer total politicians in all the theocratic governments throughout the world than in all the democratic governments.

- theo: politicians have to understand 1)laws 2)edicts of God
- this together understanding is difficult because it consists varied ethics: secular(not specifically religious) AND spiritual(pertaining to religion or beliefs)
-many people cannot adequately fulfill this requirement
-that is why there are more politicians of democratic govt. Than there are politicians in Theo govt.

Conclusion:many people cannot fulfill this requirement

Think: politicians in Theo need somewhat weird understanding which involves two opposite facets 1) related to secularism 2) more religious and with beliefs
Now the author tells us that the understanding is difficult , also he tells us that the politicians not only have to consider X but also Y...but are the edicts a necessary element to run the govt?? I mean if the politicians do not take the abstract element into account ,will the governance end??? Or will the decisions be stopped??

(A) There are not more democratic nations than theocratic nations in the world. 
- though this is OA, I'm reserved about this for following reasons
: 1)Nation= public point of view
2) a democratic nation does not have decisions to be made which involve abstract elements to be considered
eg: India is the largest democracy but the govt(politicians) HAVE TO(NEED TO) consider the religious (abstract) aspects before making any decisions...trust me this is true... So basically this is more like Theo politicians in demo govt.

(B) Theocratic politicians need to assess the spirituality of their polity when making decisions. 
- I go for this .. if politicians do not NEED to assess the abstract then the reason(that is the conclusion) the fact( more Theo politicians than demo ) is based on some other reason and not the conclusion (unfulfillment of requirement)

This actually goes beyond general knowledge...do we know a democratic nation does not take into account the abstract facet and a democratic nation is actually what the public demands.. the greatest example I present against this question is INDIA (largest democratic country in the world) ,where decisions if at all go against even one religion , just watch the news the next day then

Posted from my mobile device

ParthSanghavi · Answer

Can you please explain the last line of the argument?

From what i understand is that the number of total (theocratic) politicians is lesser than the number of democratic politicians in the world.

I agree with (B) as well. The argument says that due to the dual responsibility, not many people can take up such a role. (B) tells us why- they have to consider the religious aspect as well

AdityaHongunti · Answer

ParthSanghavi  
You are right in your analysis. Additionally, this question hinges on very philosophical/constitutional knowledge ,which is beyond a certain level of understanding the GMAT expects from us

According to me

Posted from my mobile device

PierTotti17 · Answer

Author is saying that because of the complex nature of theocracy, there are fewer politicians that are qualified that can fit into this role.

Author therefore says that there are FEWER TOTAL THEOCRATIC POLITICIANS than TOTAL DEMOCRATIC POLITICIANS in the WHOLE WORLD simply because a theocracy is more complex than a democracy. Fair enough. What important detail does the author omit?

Maybe the reason why there are FEWER TOTAL THEOCRATIC POLITICIANS than TOTAL DEMOCRATIC POLITICIANS is because there are FEWER THEOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS IN THE WORLD. Sure, the complex nature of a theocracy might mean that it is harder to find reasonable candidates. But this conclusion can only be sustained if we knew the EXACT number of total democracies and theocracies in the world. Imagine 2 known theocracies in the world with 5 politicians versus 100 known democracies with only 2 politicians each (10 total people versus 200 total people) --> big difference. Therefore, the assumption is that the total number of governments or institutions is the same (specifically that the number of theocracies = number of democracies).

A) correctly identifies this assumption. I.e, if there were an equal amount of democracies and theocracies, then yes, we might see fewer total theocratic politicians than total democratic politicians.

akshitab2912 · Answer

chetan2u  : sir, i could not chose between D and A - can you pls help in getting the hang of the question...

chokhi · Answer

@karishmaB kindly explain why A is correct not B??

Ashutoshks · Answer

Can anyone solve this by negation? I don't think option A will have any effect of negation. If more Demo > Theo - More politicians there, if Theo > Demo still more politicians in Demo as per passage.

At the same time, the total no. of politicians (even if lesser) in one large Theo country can be greater than 10 small democratic countries.

ClaireCHEN · Answer

Premise : Theocracy has higher requirement in understanding both secular land law knowledge and abstract spiritual knowledge, few people can fulfill this requirement
 Conclusion : ttl n of theocratic politicians is less than the ttl n of democratic politicians

For the argument to be logically correct, it must make which of the following assumptions?
(A) There are not more democratic nations than theocratic nations in the world. --  YES. If there are more democratic nations than theocratic nations, then the ttl n of democratics is more than the ttl n of theocratics would be caused by the diiferent denominators but not the requirements of theocratics itself.

(B) Theocratic politicians need to assess the spirituality of their polity when making decisions. --  NO. Irrelevant to reasoning above between the knowledge capturing level and ttl n

(C) Theocratic nations satisfy the needs of their people better by using fewer politicians. --  NO. Irrelevant to the conclusion.

(D) Democratic nations require a larger number of politicians on average due to the numerous factions that their politicians represent. -- NO. Doesn't necessarily mean the theocratic politicians number cannot exceed.

(E) The edicts of any sort of god are not knowable or understandable as they apply to politics. -- NO. It's against the statement of these knowledge is just hard to know or understand, but not "not knowable or understandable"

In a theocracy, politicians not only have to understand the laws

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

In a theocracy, politicians not only have to understand the laws

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