Statement–Assumption (Ideas vs. Protagonists in Determining Impact): Statement: “Ideas have always been more potent than the actual protagonists who act them out.” Assumptions: I) Famous protagonists can make any idea famous despite the lesser importance of the idea itself. II) Ideas and protagonists have exactly the same importance in any play or public action.

Introduction / Context:
The statement makes a comparative claim: the driving force behind outcomes is the idea rather than the individuals (protagonists) who enact it. Questions of this type ask which assumptions must be true for the statement to meaningfully stand. We test each proposed assumption for necessity, not mere plausibility.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Claim: Ideas > protagonists in potency.
• Domain: social action, theatre, movements, leadership.
• Focus: what the statement needs to presume to be sensible.

Concept / Approach:
An assumption is implicit if, when you negate it, the original statement becomes weak, absurd, or pointless. If the statement remains coherent after negation, that assumption is not implicit.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Assumption I (“Famous protagonists can make any idea famous despite the idea’s lesser importance.”): This is not required. The statement argues the general primacy of ideas; it does not make a universal negative about protagonist influence, nor does it assert that protagonists cannot amplify ideas. Whether celebrities can popularise weak ideas is irrelevant to the claim that ideas are more potent in the long run.Assumption II (“Ideas and protagonists have exactly the same importance.”): The statement explicitly rejects equality by privileging ideas. It certainly does not need to presume equality; indeed, it presumes the opposite. Hence II cannot be implicit.

Verification / Alternative check:
Negating I (i.e., celebrities cannot make any idea famous) still leaves the claim “ideas are more potent” intact. Negating II (importance is not equal) actually aligns with the statement. Thus neither I nor II is necessary.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Only I” or “Only II” each smuggles in content the statement does not rely upon. “Either I or II” fails because the statement needs neither to hold.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing long-term structural potency (ideas shaping institutions and norms) with short-term visibility effects (star power).

Final Answer:
Neither I nor II is implicit.