It is said of parasitic forms of life that, although they burden their hosts, they do not kill them, since a parasite cannot survive unless its host does. Mr. Craig's prize-winning lilies, however, were invaded by dodder, a parasitic plant, and every one of the lilies died soon after. Plainly, therefore, a parasite can be deadly.The conclusion of the argument is the following:
Plainly ... a parasite can be deadly.The support for the conclusion is the following:
Mr. Craig's prize-winning lilies ... were invaded by dodder, a parasitic plant, and every one of the lilies died soon after.We see that the reasoning of the argument is basically that, since these lilies died soon after being invaded by a parasitic plant, it must be the case that a parasite can be deadly.
In other words, the author has observed that one event, the death of the lilies, occurred after another, the invasion by dodder, and has decided that the first led to the second.
The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?This is an Assumption question, and the correct answer will state something that must be true for the evidence in the argument to effectively support the conclusion.
A) Mr. Craig did nothing to control the dodder that was invading his lilies.This choice doesn't have to be true for the argument to work.
After all, even if Mr. Craig did something to control the dodder, it still appears that the dodder killed the lilies. In fact, if Mr. Craig did do something to control the dodder, then the dodder appears to be even more deadly than it originally appeared since, even controlled, it still killed the lilies.
So, this choice doesn't state a necessary assumption.
Eliminate.
B) Mr. Craig's lilies were not infected with a virus deadly to lilies before being invaded by dodder.This choice is interesting.
After all, if this choice is not true and Mr. Craig's lilies WERE infected with a virus deadly to lilies before being invaded by dodder, then the fact that the lilies died soon after being invaded by dodder doesn't effectively support the conclusion. After all, in that case, even though the lilies died soon after being invaded by dodder, it could very well be that the dodder was not deadly since it could be that the virus, rather than the dodder, killed the lilies.
So, for the argument to work, this choice has to be true.
Keep.
C) Dodder is not usually a parasite of lilies.For the conclusion that a parasite can be deadly to follow from the evidence, it has to be the that, at least in this case, the dodder WAS a parasite of lilies.
So, the argument certainly does not require the assumption that dodder is NOT a parasite of lilies, either in this particular case or "usually."
Eliminate.
D) Lilies are especially susceptible to being weakened by invading parasites.The conclusion of the argument is that, in general, parasites can be deadly.
So, the support for the conclusion doesn't require the assumption that lilies are a special case in that lilies are especially susceptible to being weakened by invading parasites.
In fact, the argument would be even more convincing if this choice were not true. After all, the fact that lilies are NOT especially susceptible to being weakened by invading parasites would make dodder seem even more deadly since, in that case, dodder appears to have killed plants that are not especially susceptible to being weakened by invading parasites.
So, this choice clearly is not an assumption on which the argument depends.
Eliminate.
E) Mr. Craig's lilies were invaded by an unusually vigorous strain of dodder.This choice has the wrong effect.
If what it says is true, it could be an explanation for why the lilies died after being invaded by the dodder. Perhaps, dodder doesn't usuallly kill lilies, but in this case, the dodder killed the lilies because it was unusually vigorous.
The issue is that we don't need an explanation. We need something that must be true for the evidence to support the conclusion.
Regardless of whether the dodder was unusually vigorous, the fact that the lilies died soon after being invaded by the dodder appears to support the conclusion that a parasite can be deadly.
So, this choice does not state an assumption on which the argument depends.
Eliminate.
Correct answer: B