Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: Only II is implicit
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:The reason given for Arun’s move is salary inadequacy. We must see which background beliefs must be true for this to be rational.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:
Step-by-Step Solution:
II is required: the present salary is inadequate, hence characterized as moderate/low for his needs.I is optional/unknown: environment could be better, worse, or the same; decision is justified by pay alone.III is unnecessary: it suffices that Arun’s own offer is higher; a blanket statement about all employees is not needed.Verification / Alternative check:
If II were false (present pay already adequate), the move contradicts the reason provided. If I or III were false, the move can still be justified by Arun’s own package.Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“All are implicit” overreaches; “II and III” adds needless generalization; “None” ignores the explicit inadequacy premise.Common Pitfalls:
Assuming generalized policies of the new employer when only an individual offer matters.Final Answer:
Only II is implicit
Discussion & Comments