Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardSufficient Assumption

Legal Scholar: A legal framework is effective only if it continuously adapts to changing societal norms. Furthermore, a framework adapts to changing societal norms if and only if it grants judges broad interpretative discretion. Hence, any effective legal framework must grant judges broad interpretative discretion. Rigid statutory mandates, however, prevent a legal framework from granting judges broad interpretative discretion. Therefore, it is clear that any jurisdiction whose legal framework relies heavily on rigid statutory mandates will ultimately fail to sustain a prosperous economy.

Which one of the following, if assumed, allows the legal scholar's conclusion to be properly drawn?

  1. A jurisdiction can sustain a prosperous economy only if its legal framework is effective.Answer
  2. B
    No jurisdiction whose legal framework relies heavily on rigid statutory mandates has an effective legal framework.
  3. C
    Any jurisdiction that avoids relying heavily on rigid statutory mandates will successfully sustain a prosperous economy.
  4. D
    Any jurisdiction that fails to sustain a prosperous economy has an ineffective legal framework.
  5. E
    At least one jurisdiction that relies heavily on rigid statutory mandates will fail to sustain a prosperous economy.

Answer

A jurisdiction can sustain a prosperous economy only if its legal framework is effective.
The argument's premises establish a continuous chain of logic: Rigid statutory mandates prevent broad discretion, which prevents adapting to norms, which ultimately means the framework is not effective. So, Rigid Mandates = Not Effective. The conclusion takes a leap, claiming Rigid Mandates = Not Prosperous. To make this conclusion logically bulletproof, we must assume that being 'Not Effective' mathematically guarantees being 'Not Prosperous' (Not Effective -> Not Prosperous). The correct answer provides the logical contrapositive of this exact rule: A prosperous economy requires an effective framework (Prosperous -> Effective). If this is assumed, the scholar's conclusion follows with absolute certainty.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Map the conditional relationships in the premises.
Effective -> Adapts. Adapts <-> Grants Discretion. Rigid Mandates -> NOT Grants Discretion.
Formal logic mapping is required to see how the premises logically connect to one another.
2
Chain the premises together to find the intermediate deduction.
Since Rigid Mandates -> NOT Grants Discretion, and Effective -> Grants Discretion (via Adapts), it follows that Rigid Mandates -> NOT Effective.
This establishes exactly what we know about jurisdictions with rigid statutory mandates based solely on the provided evidence.
3
Identify the main conclusion and isolate the logical gap.
The main conclusion is: Rigid Mandates -> NOT Prosperous Economy. The gap is between the end of our premise chain ('NOT Effective') and the new term in the conclusion ('NOT Prosperous Economy').
A sufficient assumption must introduce a rule that seamlessly connects the established evidence to the new claim.
4
Formulate the required assumption and find its match in the options.
We need the rule 'NOT Effective -> NOT Prosperous Economy'. The contrapositive of this rule is 'Prosperous Economy -> Effective', which translates to 'A prosperous economy requires an effective framework'. This perfectly matches the correct option.
This bridge makes the conclusion 100% deductively valid, satisfying the task of a Sufficient Assumption question.

Key Concept

Sufficient Assumption conditional chaining and contrapositives
Rate this question

Topics

Sufficient Assumption

More questions from this topic