PT8.S1.Q20 - Can someone explain the answer choice?

HizekielHizekiel Live Member
edited August 2022 in Logical Reasoning 49 karma

Found it pretty difficult to understand and wrap my head around.

Comments

  • Matt SorrMatt Sorr Alum Member ⭐
    2245 karma

    Which question?

  • HizekielHizekiel Live Member
    49 karma

    Thought I edited the title, my bad. Question from PT 8 S1 Q 20

  • ekhydroxideekhydroxide Core Member
    53 karma

    PT8 S1 Q20

    this was my reasoning:

    a) does nothing; if it did not have the “unless” and everything written after, it would have supported the opponents of demolition, but the “unless” statement makes it ambiguous.

    b) forces us to determine that rehabilitation is the correct choice because one proposal (demolishing the houses) precludes the possibility of trying the other approach (rehabilitating the houses)

    c) does nothing; we do not know if the government fundings are secure yet

    d) does nothing; “thoroughly investigated” is too generic of a term. is the condition of “thoroughly investigated” met if you research the alternative, or is the condition of “thoroughly investigated” met only if you actually implement the alternative. if the latter is the case, then the opponents’ of demolition proposal would have been accepted; however, the term is ambiguous, so it does not help.

    e) does nothing; if this is true, it still doesn’t help us decide if which plan we should pick

    feel free to reach out if you have any more questions! hope this helps

Sign In or Register to comment.