Corporate businesses, like species, must adapt to survive. Businesses that are no longer efficient will become extinc...

Shiyi-Zhang on February 5, 2019

Why is C incorrect?

Ravi on February 8, 2019

@djayasinghe and @Shiyi-Zhang,

Happy to help. Let's first analyze the argument before looking at the
answer choices.

The argument says that corporate businesses must adapt to survive and
that inefficient companies will become extinct. We're then told that
some companies had had to change their corporate philosophy to adapt.
From this, the argument concludes that sometimes a business can
survive only by becoming a different corporation.

That's strange. In the conclusion we're told about 'becoming a
different corporation,' but this isn't mentioned anywhere in the rest
of the stimulus.

The question stem asks, "Which one of the following is an assumption
required by the argument?"

This is a strengthen with a necessary premise. Based on the stimulus,
the argument says sometimes a business cannot adapt without changing
its core corporate philosophy and then concludes from this that
sometimes a business cannot survive without becoming a different
corporation.

In arguing this, the argument has a pretty big gap between changing
corporate philosophy and becoming a different corporation. In fact, if
we're to accept the argument's conclusion, then we must necessarily
assume that a changing in corporate philosophy makes the company
becomes a different corporation. This is the gap in the argument and
in this question, we can anticipate the necessary premise before
looking at the answer choices.

Additionally, as with all strengthen with a necessary premise
questions, we can use the negation test to see whether the answer
choices must be true in order for the argument to stand a chance. In
negating the answers, we're effectively pretending that the opposite
is true, and if this makes the argument fall apart, then we know that
the answer choice in its original form is necessary for the argument.

(C) says, "Different corporations have different core corporate philosophies."

The negation for (C) is that different corporations don't have
different core philosophies. This is a tricky answer choice, but when
we negate it, we see that the negation doesn't make the argument fall
apart. It's simply not required that, in order for the argument to
hold, that there are different core corporate philosophies. It's
entirely possible that different corporations have identical core
corporate philosophies. What's not possible is that a corporation can
change its core corporate philosophy without becoming a new
corporation, as we anticipated above.

(E) says, "A business cannot change its core corporate philosophy
without becoming a different corporation."

(E)'s negation is a business can change its core philosophy without
becoming a different corporation.

(E) is exactly what we anticipated in our argument analysis, and it is
necessary for the argument because it bridges the gap between changing
core corporate philosophy and becoming a different corporation.

Additionally, if (E)'s negation were true, the argument would fall
apart because there would be no connection between the argument's
premise that sometimes a business cannot adapt without changing its
core corporate philosophy and its conclusion that sometimes a business
can survive only by becoming a new corporation. Because of this, (E)
is the correct answer choice.

Does this help? Let us know if you have any more questions!

gideon on August 8, 2019

Thanks @Ravi

Ravi on August 8, 2019

@gideon, you're welcome! I'm happy to read that it helped!