PT62.S2.Q25: University president: Our pool of applicants

tonypepperonitonypepperoni Monthly Member
edited January 2022 in Logical Reasoning 80 karma

This is the LR question about a university president's concerns that applicant numbers are shrinking due to the low tuition costs of the university.

(A) suggests that the missing assumption is that the proposed reason for shrinking applicant numbers is true (if that proposition is false, the conclusion is false)

(D) suggests that there are no other reasons to explain the university's shrinking number of applicants (i.e. the original hypothesis is true).

These appear absolutely identical to me. Can someone explain how they are not?


Admin Note:


  • u______uu______u Monthly Member
    217 karma

    Easiest way to see why D is different than A is to negate it. What if university tuition has increased? Maybe it increased by $1, which, although small, still counts as an increase. But that doesn't do anything for a conclusion that says "we need to raise our tuition." Conversely, if you negate A, the conclusion doesn't hold up. If you look at how the conclusion is reached, you'll see that the university president's conclusion is based solely off the "one possible explanation."Therefore, if that explanation doesn't apply in this case, then raising tuition won't do anything to increase the size of the applicant pool.

  • tonypepperonitonypepperoni Monthly Member
    80 karma

    Great, thanks!

Sign In or Register to comment.