Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumIdentifying Sufficient Assumptions

Legal Scholar: Any judicial system that prioritizes procedural efficiency over the substantive fairness of its outcomes will inevitably lose the public's trust. Furthermore, historical evidence demonstrates that without the public's trust, a judicial system cannot effectively enforce its rulings without resorting to widespread coercion. Therefore, the newly proposed municipal arbitration framework will fail to enforce its rulings without resorting to coercion.

Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the conclusion to be properly drawn?

  1. The newly proposed municipal arbitration framework is a judicial system that prioritizes procedural efficiency over the substantive fairness of its outcomes.Answer
  2. B
    The newly proposed municipal arbitration framework operates as a judicial system within the local government.
  3. C
    Any judicial system that fails to enforce its rulings without resorting to coercion prioritizes procedural efficiency over the substantive fairness of its outcomes.
  4. D
    Any judicial system that prioritizes the substantive fairness of its outcomes over procedural efficiency will maintain the public's trust.
  5. E
    Some judicial systems that prioritize procedural efficiency over the substantive fairness of their outcomes are able to effectively enforce their rulings without resorting to coercion.

Answer

The statement identifying the newly proposed municipal arbitration framework as a judicial system that prioritizes procedural efficiency over the substantive fairness of its outcomes.
The argument's conclusion requires establishing that the newly proposed framework will fail to enforce its rulings without coercion. The premises state that being a judicial system which prioritizes procedural efficiency leads to losing public trust, which in turn leads to this exact failure. The correct answer acts as the perfect logical bridge by confirming the new framework meets all the necessary triggers of the premises.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that the newly proposed municipal arbitration framework will fail to enforce its rulings without resorting to coercion.
Locating the conclusion is the critical first step to determine what logical gap needs to be bridged.
2
Analyze the premises provided in support of the conclusion.
Premise 1 establishes: Judicial System + Prioritizes Efficiency -> Loses Public Trust. Premise 2 establishes: Judicial System + Loses Public Trust -> Cannot Enforce Without Coercion.
Understanding the conditional rules is necessary to map the formal logic of the argument.
3
Identify the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The premises provide a chain of outcomes for a 'judicial system' that 'prioritizes procedural efficiency'. However, the conclusion makes a claim about the 'newly proposed municipal arbitration framework', which the premises never explicitly link to these conditions.
A sufficient assumption must completely bridge the gap between the evidence provided and the new elements introduced in the conclusion.
4
Formulate the sufficient assumption.
To guarantee the conclusion, we must assume that the new framework falls under the established rule: it must be a judicial system that prioritizes procedural efficiency over substantive fairness.
If this assumption is true, it triggers the entire chain of conditional premises, making the conclusion 100% logically valid.

Key Concept

Sufficient Assumption in Formal Logic Chains
Rate this question

Topics

Identifying Sufficient Assumptions

More questions from this topic