Q18 - In order to cut costs and thereby maximize profit

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Sufficient Assumption

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: It was wrong of Mr. Kapp to use inferior materials to construct library in order to cut costs.
Evidence: He realized his action would put people at serious risk.

Answer Anticipation:
This one lends itself to a fairly straightforward Bridge idea: "If you knowingly put people at serious risk in order to cut costs / maximize profit, it is wrong."

Correct Answer:
D

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) This isn't a rule that lets us prove that someone did something "wrong".

(B) This isn't a rule that lets us prove that someone did something "wrong". It just allows for the possibility of something being "wrong".

(C) No mechanism to prove someone did something "wrong"

(D) YES, just like our prediction. "If knowingly put people at serious risk in order to cut costs / max out profit, then you did something wrong."

(E) No mechanism to prove someone did something "wrong"

Takeaway/Pattern: On Sufficient Assumption, we have to prove the wording in the conclusion. Here, we need to prove that Mr. K did something "wrong", so we need a legal definition that says "If you did xyz --> you did something wrong". Since the argument never defined a "If X, then wrong" type rule, the correct answer must. This makes it really easy to eliminate A/C/E, and upon closer inspection B as well. You may sometimes hear this referred to as the NEW GUY IN THE CONCLUSION shortcut on Sufficient Assumption.

#officialexplanation