Question

More than a year ago, the city announced that police would crack down on illegally parked cars and that resources would be diverted from writing speeding tickets to ticketing illegally parked cars. But no crackdown has taken place. The police chief claims that resources have had to be diverted from writing speeding tickets to combating the city's staggering drug problem. Yet the police are still writing as many speeding tickets as ever. Therefore, the excuse about resources being tied up in fighting drug-related crime simply is not true. The conclusion in the passage depends on the assumption that (A) every member of the police force is qualified to work on combating the city's drug problem (B) drug-related crime is not as serious a problem for the city as the police chief claims it is (C) writing speeding tickets should be as important a priority for the city as combating drug-related crime (D) the police could be cracking down on illegally parked cars and combating the drug problem without having to reduce writing speeding tickets (E) the police cannot continue writing as many speeding tickets as ever while diverting resources to combating drug-related crime

Short answer

(E) The police cannot continue writing as many speeding tickets while diverting resources to combating drug-related crime.

Step-by-step solution

Identify the Conclusion

The conclusion of the passage is that the police chief's excuse about resources being tied up in fighting drug-related crime is not true.

Understand Why the Conclusion is Drawn

The passage provides evidence that speeding tickets are still being written at the same rate despite the claim of resources being diverted to other priorities, which is used to support the conclusion.

Define Necessary Assumption

A necessary assumption is an unstated premise that must be true for the conclusion to hold. This requires looking for something the conclusion says implicitly but doesn't prove outright.

Analyze the Options

Evaluate each option: - (A) Talks about police qualifications unrelated to ticket writing. - (B) Questions the seriousness of drug-related crime itself, not resources. - (C) Implies a priority for ticket writing, not resources. - (D) Suggests both tasks can be done without impairing the ticket writing. - (E) Directly relates to resources affecting ticket writing.

Choose the Necessary Assumption

Option (E) is the correct choice because it assumes that there would be an effect on the speed ticket output if resources truly had been diverted to combating drug-related crime, which supports the known fact of ticketing not diminishing. Thus, it challenges the truth of the police chief's claim on resources.

Key concepts

Assumptions Analysis

Analyzing assumptions is an essential skill in understanding arguments. In logic, an assumption is something that is accepted as true without evidence. In the context of the exercise, we need to identify the implicit statements that must hold true for the argument to make sense.

This involves:

• Identifying what the argument relies on but does not explicitly state.
• Recognizing the potential gaps between stated facts and the conclusion drawn.
• Determining how these gaps, if unaddressed, could undermine the argument.

The critical step in assumptions analysis is being able to discern these hidden premises and understanding how they foster the transition from evidence to conclusion.

Argument Evaluation

Evaluating an argument involves assessing its strength and the validity of its reasoning. In the exercise, we have a scenario where certain claims about resource allocation and ticket writing are put forth. Evaluating this involves:

• Identifying the main conclusion - here, it is the police chief's explanation.
• Determining if the evidence provided aligns with the conclusion - in this case, whether writing speeding tickets contradicts the claim of resources being diverted.
• Scrutinizing the logic of the argument - checking if the relationship between evidence and the conclusion is sound and not misleading.

This step requires careful consideration of each statement and whether it logically supports the conclusion, ensuring the argument is both valid and persuasive.

Necessary Assumptions

Necessary assumptions are foundational to the argument's validity. For an argument to uphold its conclusion, there must be certain truths that cannot waver. In the exercise context, the necessary assumption selected was (E) - that resources being diverted would impact the number of speeding tickets written.

Understanding necessary assumptions involves:

• Identifying which assumptions are indispensable for the argument to remain valid.
• Recognizing that if these assumptions were not true, the conclusion could collapse.
• Finding gaps in the argument that these assumptions fill.

Necessary assumptions bridge the gap between evidence and conclusion by being the underlying truths that must exist for the argument to hold firm.

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is the art of analyzing and evaluating an argument in a disciplined way. It requires a keen eye for detail and a mind open to questioning. In the exercise, critical thinking pushes us to:

• Question the police chief's rationale and seek out possible oversights in the reasoning.
• Think beyond the given evidence, scrutinizing each stated and unstated presumption.
• Understand the logical flow and recognize any possible fallacies or shortcuts in the reasoning.

By engaging in critical thinking, we equip ourselves to independently assess arguments, identify flaws, and construct well-reasoned solutions that stand up to scrutiny.