The chairperson should not have released the Election Commission's report to the public, for the chairperson did not ...

Rachel on April 25, 2018

Please explain

Could you please explain why the answer is A and not D? I'm confused how you know it would have permissible to release the report even if not all of the members agreed?

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Anita on April 26, 2018

D is different from A in that D says the decision would have been justified if the commission members would have agreed IF they had been consulted - however, this leaves open room for the chair not to ask if he already thinks/knows that they would have agreed. It also clarifies that it has to be each member.

A says that it's only justified if the majority of the commission (actively) give their consent. This seems to be the assumption in the prompt - that at least some, or likely a majority, of the commission should have consented to the report going out - that the chair was wrong in doing so because he did not consult them.

Does that help?

Rachel on April 27, 2018

Hmm I'm still not quite getting it. I think I'm confused cause D implies all of the members consent are given and A just says most?

Anita on May 1, 2018

Yes, D says all of them WOULD consent IF asked, not that they must be. This means that they don't necessarily have to give consent, either - just that they would have if they had been asked.

A says a MAJORITY MUST give consent. It takes out the unanimity and demands actual action on the part of the commissioners.

Molly on September 4, 2018


Can you please help me diagram this in terms of necessary premise?

Thank you!


Max on September 5, 2018

@mj-thoms this is a sufficient assumption question. In other words, we are looking for a premise that IF TRUE, makes the conclusion valid.

We are given: 1) not COM (consult other members)
C: not SHRR (should have released report)

So we are looking for a bridge to connect not COM to not SHRR. So diagrammed out (with the contrapositive):
Not COM ==> not SHRR

So if we assume (A), you'll see that CMOM (consult most other members) is a NECESSARY condition of SHRR. In other words, SHRR ==> CMOM. Since we know that not COM is a given premise, CMOM cannot possibly be true. Therefore, we can properly conclude not SHRR.

Note that even though (A) includes the word "most" instead of "any" like the original premise, it's OK for a sufficient assumption to be "overkill." If this was a necessary assumption question, the word "most" would've been too strong.

I hope that helps!

on October 11, 2019

I'm sorry, I'm really lost. That explanation didn't make sense to me.