This is a very hard question.
Not because of the argument, which is pretty straight forward. Rather, it's because of a very enticing trap wrong answer choice.
This is a Necessary Assumption question. We know this because the question stem states that the right answer choice "must" be assumed. It's needed. It's necessary.
If you don't know the difference between Necessary Assumptions v. Sufficient Assumptions, review that lesson.
The argument is saying that on a talk show, therapy is expected to be entertaining. I'm wondering, okay, it's expected to be entertaining but that doesn't mean the therapist will make it entertaining. Assuming otherwise is just that, an assumption.
We read on to find out that entertaining --almost always--> not high quality help. Now, this is just begging us to make the assumption that high quality help is to be valued over entertainment. And okay, you can assume that if you want. Just be aware you're making that assumption.
Otherwise, the conclusion that follows - therefore therapists shouldn't do therapy on talk shows - will just seem so natural and obvious to you that you're thinking, well okay then, I think this is a fantastic argument. That's not good because you needed to have seen and felt the gap, the assumption made.
Piecing the two premises together, we only get to say that therapists doing therapy on talk shows are expected to do something that's likely going to result in less-than-high-quality-therapy.
So what are the chances that they will provide less-than-high-quality-therapy? Well that depends on the chances that they do what the talk show expects them to do. We can change this number around later, but let's just say they're 70% likely to do what they're expected to do, so they're 70% likely to provide less-than-high-quality-therapy.
Does it follow from that statement that therapists should not do therapy on talk shows?
Only if we draw a bridge between those two statements.
So, hey, look at (C). It draw an awesome bridge. It says that anytime there is even a chance that the therapy might be less than high quality, it should not be provided. Think about what that means. It's setting a very low trigger. What if there is only a 2% chance of us providing less than high quality therapy? (C) would trigger and it would say "Sorry, a chance exists, so no go."
Now, for our case, the chances that on our therapist will provide less-than-high-quality-therapy on the talk show is a whopping 70%. Of course (C), with its low trigger, triggers and helps our argument a lot.
But we call that a sufficient assumption, not a necessary assumption. Remember your first lesson in Necessary Assumptions? You can see this just by tossing (C) out. You can deny that the trigger has to be that low. You can raise the trigger by, say, 10% and it would NOT wreck our argument. In fact, that's still low enough to trigger for our premises.
So you see that (C) really is not necessary.
(E) sets the trigger just right. It increases the trigger from (C) to just around 70%. The trigger condition is set to match the condition laid out in the two premises.
Note: Like many difficult Agree/Disagree questions, part of the difficulty of this question derives from the fact that first, we're being asked to do an MSS question on Tania's statements. Only after can we do the Disagree question. Stated another way, the disagreement is not explicitly stated for Tania (while it is for Monique). It's implicit (in an MSS way) from Tania's statements.
Tania never says that all art criticism is biased. But you can derive that conclusion from what Tania does say. It's like if I asked you to look at Tania's statements and ask you to pretend that it was an MSS question. What answer could you come up with? You could come up with "all art criticism is biased." Having finished up this MSS question, now we are properly armed to tackle the disagree question.
This is very similar to Question 17 in the same section.
As an example, if there are 50 attacks during the day and 2 attacks at night, but 10,000 people swim during the day and 10 people swim at night, it’s much more dangerous to swim at night, even though the number of night attacks is fewer.
A
overlooks the possibility that some sharks are primarily nocturnal hunters
B
bases its conclusion on evidence from an unreliable source
C
overlooks the possibility that swimmers might feel anxiety caused by not being able to see one’s surroundings in the dark
D
presumes, without providing justification, that swimmers cannot be the most knowledgeable about which times of day are safest for swimming
E
fails to take into account the possibility that the number of shark attacks at night would increase dramatically if more people swam at night
Denise: Crime will be reduced only when punishment is certain and is sufficiently severe to give anyone considering committing a crime reason to decide against doing so.
Reshmi: No, crime will be most effectively reduced if educational opportunities are made readily available to everyone, so that those who once viewed criminal activity as the only means of securing a comfortable lifestyle will choose a different path.
Speaker 1 Summary
Denise tells us about two requirements in order for crime to be reduced. First, punishment must be certain. And second, punishment must be severe enough to convince someone considering whether to commit a crime to decide not to do so.
Speaker 2 Summary
Reshmi asserts that crime is most effectively reduced by providing educational opportunities to everyone. This encourages criminals to choose a law-abiding life.
Objective
We’re looking for a point of agreement. They both agree that there are factors that can influence whether a person commits a crime.
A
people are capable of choosing whether or not to commit crimes
This is a point of agreement. Denise notes that people can “decide” against committing a crime. Reshmi notes that people can “choose” a different path besides committing crimes.
B
crime is the most important issue facing modern society
Neither speaker has an opinion on what is the most important issue facing modern society.
C
reducing crime requires fair and consistent responses to criminal behavior
Neither speaker has an opinion. Denise does not describe fair and consistent responses as a requirement for reducing crime. Reshmi doesn’t speak to what is required to reduce crime.
D
crimes are committed in response to economic need
Denise doesn’t have an opinion. She doesn’t suggest that crimes are or are not committed due to economic need.
E
reducing crime requires focusing on assured punishments
Reshmi doesn’t have an opinion. She doesn’t describe any requirements for reducing crime.
A
Acme’s vice president of operations also worked as an assembly line worker when he first started at Acme.
B
Acme regularly hires top graduates of business schools and employs them briefly in each of a succession of entry-level positions before promoting them to management.
C
Acme promotes its own employees to senior management positions much more frequently than it hires senior managers from other companies.
D
Ms. Garon worked at Acme for more than 20 years before she was promoted to president.
E
Acme pays entry-level employees slightly higher wages than most other businesses in the same industry.
Lana: But television is expressly for the viewing public. So a producer is more like a CEO than like an artist. Just as a company would be foolhardy not to consider consumers’ tastes when developing products, the TV producer must consider viewers’ preferences.