Self-study
Aisha: Conclusion Vadim is going to be laid off. ███████ ████ ██ █ ██████████ ███ ████ █████████ █████ ███████ ███ █████ ███ ██████████ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ███ █ ███████████ ███ ████ ████ ████████ ███████ █ ██████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ ████ ████████ █████ ██████████ ██ ████ ██████
Summary
The author concludes that Vadim, a programmer, is going to be laid off. This is based on the fact that his company has already decided to lay off a programmer, and the firm will follow the following rule in deciding who to lay off:
Most recently hired programmer → laid off
Missing Connection
We know the company will lay off the most recently hired programmer. So to establish that Vadim will be laid off, we want to know that he is the most recently hired programmer.
1.
Aisha's conclusion follows logically if █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ████████
a
The firm values ██████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ████ ██████ ████ ███ █████ ████████
(A) doesn’t tell us that Vadim is the most recently hired programmer. So it doesn’t guarantee that he will be laid off.
b
When Vadim was ██████ ███ ██████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ ████ ████████ █████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ██████████
(B) doesn’t tell us that Vadim is the most recently hired programmer. So it doesn’t guarantee that he will be laid off.
c
Vadim is the ████ ████████ █████ ██████████ ██ ███ █████
(C) establishes that Vadim was the most recently hired programmer at the company. So, based on the policy described, he will be the programmer who is laid off.
d
Every other programmer ██ ███ ████ ███ ████ ██████ ████ ████ ██████
(D) doesn’t tell us that Vadim is the most recently hired programmer. So it doesn’t guarantee that he will be laid off.
e
It is bad ██████ ████ ███ ████ ██████ ████ ███ ███ ████ ████████ █████ ███████████
(E) doesn’t tell us that Vadim is the most recently hired programmer. So it doesn’t guarantee that he will be laid off.