Introduction / Context:
Assurances typically target a specific public anxiety. The wording “hereafter every five years” addresses periodicity and timeliness, not the absolute possibility of ever holding elections. We must identify which fear the assurance presupposes.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Assurance: Elections will occur at five-year intervals going forward.
- Assumption I: Fear that elections may not be held at all.
- Assumption II: Fear that elections may not be held regularly after five years.
Concept / Approach:
- The phrase “every five years” directly responds to concerns about schedule/regularity.
- It does not necessarily respond to an absolute fear of “never any election,” which is a stronger, different concern.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Assumption II is necessary: If people worry about irregular or delayed elections, promising five-year periodicity addresses that precise worry.Assumption I is not necessary: One could believe elections will occur but still worry they won’t be timely. The assurance focuses on timing, not existence per se.
Verification / Alternative check:
Remove II: The assurance loses its target. Remove I: The assurance still makes sense because people might only doubt regular intervals.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
I / Either / Neither / Both: These either misidentify or overstate the addressed fear.
Common Pitfalls:
Assuming that a promise of periodicity is the same as a promise of basic existence.
Final Answer:
Only assumption II is implicit
Discussion & Comments