Pundit: People complain about how

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct60% picked this

   the apparent ineffectuality of legislative representatives is the only source of popular dissatisfaction

   Why this is right

   This is harsh sounding, for a Necessary Assumption answer, but it's also conditional, so we want to look at it as a reasoning move and see if it feels like the author made that move. "The only" is weird indicator, because it's actually a Left side (sufficient) indicator. Famously, "only / only if" are Right side (necessary ) indicators. The only is the only time you'd ever put 'only' on the left, if that dumb mnemonic helps. So this answer is saying, If there's a popular source it's about their of dissatisfaction with ? apparent legislative representatives ineffectuality The author's conclusion begins with the trigger on the left. "Whenever people complain about their reps ...", and the evidence only talks about the complaint of ineffectuality. The evidence establishes if the complaint is the reps are about ineffectuality ? doing what we elected them to The conclusion is claiming, if there's the reps are a complaint - - - - - - - - - - ? doing what we elected them to So the argument is missing the link being offered by this answer choice: if there's the complaint is a complaint ? about ineffectuality Alternatively, we could judge this answer by negating it. If we said, "There are other sources of dissatisfaction besides the apparent ineffectuality of reps", would that weaken? Yes! That would be taking us into our Objection zone of, "What about when we are popularly dissatisfied that our representatives are personally enriching themselves by making deals with foreign leaders? What about when are leaders say violent or offensive things?"

   Skill tested: Necessary Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   60%
2. B

   Out of Scope9% picked this

   governmental resources that are currently scarce cannot become more abundant except by the

   Out of Scope: more abundant Too Strong: cannot except by This sounds harsh as well (only the actions of politicians can make currently scarce recourses become more abundant). Did our author commit herself to that limiting idea? No. We can do the same move of analyzing the reasoning move: If a politician a currently scarce doesn't take action ? resource will not become more abundant Did our author ever make that move? No. Even if we contrapose and say, "If a scarce resource is going to become more abundant, it requires the action of politicians", it doesn't match a reasoning move. The author never talked about whether or not a scarce resource would become more abundant.

   9%
3. C

   Predicts Counterfactual14% picked this

   constituents would continue to be dissatisfied with the effectuality of their legislative representatives if constituents were aware of the

   It's super dubious on Must Be True or Must Be Assumed to pick an answer that judges a hypothetical or a counterfactual. Is our author assuming that constituents will be dissatisfied with the reps' apparent ineffectuality no matter what. Whether they understand or not that the need to compromise gives off the appearance of ineffectuality, they'll still be dissatisfied? We have no reason to commit the author to that view. She might think that people are genuinely confused. They are complaining about ineffectuality because they don't understand its true source. If they did understand its true source, they wouldn't complain.

   14%
4. D

   Too Strong: inevitably17% picked this

   legislative compromise inevitably results in popular dissatisfaction

   This looks scary because of the universal. We can look at it conditionally: If there is then there will be legislative ? popular dissatisfaction compromise with politicians Does that represent some reasoning move the author makes? No, she never acts like there's a 100% certain connection from compromise to dissatisfaction. She clearly thinks that compromise is sometimes leading to dissatisfaction, but we have nothing to support that she's assuming it always does.

   17%
5. E

   Too Strong0% picked this

   only elected public servants tend to elicit dissatisfaction among

   Too Strong: only Out of Scope: non-elected public servants This answer is indirectly commenting on non-elected public servants, saying the author assumes that non-elected public servants never have the tendency to elicit dissatisfaction from the public. We don't know anything about how the author feels about non-elected public servants.

   0%