The cities of Oldtown and Spoonville are the same in area and size of population. Since certain health problems that...

Naz on July 19, 2015

Conclusion: such problems (the certain health problems mentioned in Oldtown) must be as widespread in Spoonville.

Why? We are told that the cities of Oldtown and Spoonville are the same in area and size of population. And we know that certain health problems that are caused by crowded living conditions are widespread in Oldtown.

What's the issue here? We have not actually been given evidence that points to our conclusion. Having the same are and size of population does not mean that your living conditions must be the same, as well. One city could have architecture made to preserve as much space as city space as possible, allowing for open air and environment that could ward off against certain health problems causes by crowded living conditions that could be present in the other city. There are so many other factors one must first consider before deciding that Spoonville also has these issue.

Answer choice (E) says just that: having identical overall population density, i.e. merely having the same area and size of population, is consistent with great disparity in living conditions, i.e. could still mean that you have big differences in living conditions (see example above). Here, "being consistent" with means that it doesn't contradict or that it works alongside something else, i.e. having the same overall population density does not contradict the possibility if having great disparity in living conditions.

Hope that was helpful! Please let us know if you have any other questions.

zachmorley2 on December 10, 2020

It's still not quite clear what E is saying.

Emil-Kunkin on October 6 at 04:58PM

E is saying that population density is not the same as living conditions. That is, 1000 people in an acre could be a crowded favela with 400 small shacks, or a luxury high rise with 500 apartments.