Help

I don't understand either

@JayDee8732 and @ekaterinaurban@gmail.com In this case, the University President provides one possible explanation for the change: the low tuition. They then jump to assuming that this one possible reason IS the reason, and that changing it would lead to the desired outcome. That is, we know the low tuition is a possibility. But it’s given as ONE possibility. So we can’t conclude it’s relevant here, when there may be all sort of other reasons that need to be addressed instead.

Can you explain why can't C be correct answer,thanks

@cyhthia-lee let's diagram the argument: C: Increase Size of Applicant Pool (ICAP) ==> Increase Tuition (IT) Not IT ==> not ICAP So (C) says that IT ==> ICAP, but that does nothing to support the conclusion. I hope that helps!

What's the difference between A and D?

The difference between A and D is subtle. Answer A says: the proposed explanation applies in this case — which is correct, because the university president is saying that IF we want to increase the size of our applicant pool, we need to raise our tuition and fees. If the proposed explanation did not apply, the argument would not be valid. On the other hand, answer D says that there is no additional explanation. Does the university president’s argument REQUIRE that assumption? No! The university president could allow for the possibility that there are other explanations, and yet have some reason for believing that this “one possible explanation” applies in this case. The only assumption that is absolutely required is that it does apply in this case! Does that make sense? It is a subtle difference, and therefore a tricky question.

Can someone explain why E is incorrect? Thanks!

Thanks Jacob for the explanation. I got D and I see the difference now.