Introduction / Context:
Public invitations often highlight “free entry” to attract larger audiences. The logic usually targets affordability barriers rather than making claims about quality or general human behavior toward free events. Our task is to locate the necessary assumption(s) behind this notice.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Invitation emphasizes “free.”
- Assumption I: People avoid free events (unlikely premise for inviting).
- Assumption II: Some people want to attend but cannot afford tickets.
- Assumption III: Free programmes are generally good in quality.
Concept / Approach:
The key persuasive element is removing a price barrier. That requires assuming there exists a segment of interested but price-constrained individuals. No assumption about universal aversion to free events or guaranteed quality is necessary.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Assumption II: If nobody is constrained by ticket prices, “free” loses its attraction power. Therefore II is necessary.Assumption I: If people generally do not go to free programmes, making it free would not help; the notice would undermine itself. Not implicit.Assumption III: The claim does not hinge on quality judgements; it focuses on access. Not implicit.
Verification / Alternative check:
Negate II: With no price-constrained audience, the “free” message is redundant. This undermines the intent of the announcement.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Any option including I or III assumes more than needed (or contradicts the purpose).
Common Pitfalls:
Assuming “free” always equals “high quality”; the notice never claims that.
Final Answer:
Only II is implicit
Discussion & Comments