Commentator: If a political administration is both economically successful and successful at protecting individual li...

on May 30, 2018

Question

Why C instead of B?

3 Replies

Christopher on June 4, 2018

@meisen

(B) could be true, but the question is asking for "must be true," and there are other options that could be true.

Taken logically, To Be a Success (TBS) and administration must be Economically Successful (ES) and Successful at Protecting individual Liberties (SPL).

TBS - > ES & SPL
Not ES or Not SPL - > Not TBS

The commentator then dismisses the environment as a factor if it protects individual liberties.

So, if this administration HAS protected individual liberties despite not taking care of the environment, it is POSSIBLE that the administration has not been economically successful, which would allow for (B), or IF the administration HAS been economically successful, then the administration is an overall success (C).

It's a bit tricky because (C) adds its own premise with the "if the present administration is economically successful," but that basically adds one the final condition to differentiate between (B) and (C). If you knew that the administration was NOT economically successful, then you could conclude that (B) must be true, but we don't have that information.

J on May 28 at 05:13PM

I am sorry...I read this explanation and am still struggling with why C is the answer. The logic that was diagrammed seems backwards to me. It said if it is both economically successful and protects individual liberties then it is an overall success. Then says if it protects overall personal liberties it can be an overall success if it doesn't care for the economy. So...how do we go from there to logically conclude that C - that says IF current admin is economical successful, then it is an overall success when the stimulus states that if its doesn't care for the economy it can be an overall success.

Ravi on May 30 at 03:33PM

@jskaggs,

Great question. Let's take a look.

The commentator tells us that

Economically successful and successful at protecting individual
liberties - >overall success

We're also told that an administration that fails to care for the
environment can still succeed if it protects individual liberties

We're then told that the present administration hasn't cared for the
environment, but that it's protected individual liberties.

What do we know from this? We know that it's still possible that the
present administration may succeed overall.

What else do we know?

Economically successful and successful at protecting individual
liberties - >overall success

We know the present administration has satisfied the part of the
sufficient condition (successful at protecting individual liberties).
Thus, if it satisfies the other part of the sufficient condition
(economically successful), then we know that it is an overall success.

(C) says, "If the present administration is economically successful,
then it is an overall success." This must be true. (C) is basically
just saying that if the other part of the sufficient condition is met,
then the necessary condition must be met. This is right on the money,
and it's why (C) is correct.

Hope this helps. Let us know if you have any other questions!