Introduction / Context:
The statement ranks the decline in prices of personal computers as the largest when comparing June 2005 with December 2005, across “all the articles.” To make such a comparative and time-bound claim, certain premises must be in place. We must identify the assumptions without which this claim cannot be justified.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Reference months: June 2005 and December 2005.
- Scope: all articles, with personal computers showing the highest decline.
- Assumption I: Data for all articles at both times exists.
- Assumption II: PC prices in June exceeded PC prices in December (there was an actual decline).
Concept / Approach:
- Comparative superlative (“highest decline”) requires comparable figures across the entire set and the two time points.
- To assert a decline for PCs, June price must be greater than December price for PCs.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Assess I: Without price data for all articles in both months, one cannot conclude which article had the greatest decline. Hence I is necessary.Assess II: A “decline” specifically from June to December implies the December price for PCs is lower than the June price. Hence II is also necessary.
Verification / Alternative check:
Remove I: The ranking across all articles becomes baseless.Remove II: If PC prices did not drop, the claim collapses. Therefore both are required.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I or only II — each alone is insufficient to sustain a comparative superlative over time.Either I or II — incorrect since both are logically needed.Neither — contradicted by the reasoning above.
Common Pitfalls:
Ignoring the difference between a simple claim of decline and a superlative (“highest”) claim that requires a complete comparison set.
Final Answer:
Both I and II are implicit
Discussion & Comments