Critical Reasoning — Implicit Assumptions Advertisement claim: “The simplest and most cost-effective way to upgrade your home: exchange your old furniture and get 25%–33% off on new furniture.”
-
AOnly I is implicit
-
BOnly II is implicit
-
COnly III is implicit
-
DOnly I and II are implicit
-
ENone of these
Answer
Correct Answer: Only III is implicit
Explanation
Introduction / Context:In assumption questions, we test which hidden belief must be true for a statement or advertisement to make sense. Here, a furniture company promotes an exchange offer as the “simplest and most cost-effective way to upgrade” one’s home by giving 25%–33% off when old furniture is exchanged.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- I. Nowadays there is no demand for furniture products unless an attractive scheme is offered.
- II. Some customers always desire the best quality and do not bother about cost or convenience.
- III. Some customers want to keep their home up-to-date with reasonable cost and with fewer hassles.
Concept / Approach:Advertisements presuppose an audience with needs aligned to the pitch. A claim of “simplest” and “cost-effective” specifically targets buyers seeking an easy, economical upgrade path. We must check which assumption is necessary for this pitch to be meaningful.
Step-by-Step Solution:
1) The ad asserts that exchanging old furniture plus a 25%–33% discount is a practical, economical way to upgrade. This clearly aligns with buyers who want to modernize their homes at reasonable cost and with less hassle. That is exactly Assumption III.2) Assumption I is too extreme. Demand for furniture does not need to be zero without schemes. Regular demand can exist; the ad simply aims to increase conversions.3) Assumption II is irrelevant to the pitch. People who “do not bother about cost or convenience” are not the primary target of a cost-saving, low-hassle offer.Verification / Alternative check:If we negate Assumption III (no buyers want affordable, low-hassle upgrades), the ad’s promise loses its persuasive foundation. Negating I or II does not invalidate the ad’s logic.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
- I: Unnecessary and unrealistic generalization.
- II: Not connected to “cost-effective” and “simplest.”
- I and II: Combines two non-essential claims.
- None of these: Incorrect because III is necessary.
Common Pitfalls:Confusing the ad’s target segment (value-seekers) with all potential customers, or assuming demand is zero without offers.
Final Answer:Only III is implicit