The quantity and type of pollution that entered the river last Thursday night suggest that the local auto repair shop is responsible. ███ ███ ███████ ███ ████ ████ ██ █████████ ██ ██ ██████ █████ ██████ ████████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██████ ███████████████ ██ ██████ ██ ████████████ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ███████ ████████ ███ ████████
Although evidence suggests the auto repair shop is responsible for polluting the river, we should not punish them without more evidence or a confession. This is because the punishment would be quite severe.
The author presents the idea of a harsh punishment to suggest that more evidence is needed, but we don’t have a premise that tells us why this matters. The author is assuming the severity of the punishment means we need more evidence, so we are looking for a rule to clearly state this assumption:
Severe punishments require more evidence.
Which one of the following ███████████ ██ ██████ ████ █████ ██ ███████ ███ █████████ ██ ███ █████████
The more severe ███ ███████ ███ ██ ██████████ ███ ███ ████ ███████ ███ ████ ██ ██ ███ █████ ██ █ █████ ██████ █████ █████████ ██ ████████ ███ ███████ ██ ████ ██████
(A) establishes why the severity of the punishment for polluting the river means we need more evidence—the more severe the punishment, the more evidence you need.
Penalties for crimes ██████ ██ ██████ ██████ ██ █████ ██████ ████ ██████████ █████ ███ ███ ██ ██████ ██ ██ █████████ █████ ███████████ ██ ██████ █████
(B) does nothing to connect severe punishments with the need for more evidence. It ignores evidence entirely and therefore does nothing to support the argument.
The severity of ███ ███████ ███████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████████████ ██ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ████ ███████████
We have no clue how much harm was caused by the pollution, so we can’t use this rule. (C) also does nothing to tell us why we need more evidence.
The more severe ███ ███████ ███ ██ ███████ ███ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ██ ████ ███████ ████ ████ ███████ ███ █████ ██████████████ ███ ███ ████████
(D) seems to suggest that the perpetrator would be unlikely to admit to polluting the river, but this does not address the need for more evidence.
The severity of ███ ███████ ███ ██ ███████ ██████ ███ ██ ██ █████ ████ ███ ███ █████ ██ ████████████ ███████ ██ █████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ███ ████ ████████
(E) might imply that the punishment for polluting the river should be less, but that is an entirely separate conclusion. We want something that links the severity of the punishment to a need for more evidence.