Introduction / Context:
The government’s action is a crisis-management measure aimed at reducing violence. For such a measure to be reasonable, it must be grounded in beliefs about what the closure will achieve in the short term, both temporally and logistically.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Action: A two-week statewide closure of educational institutions.
- Assumption I: The agitation is likely to cool down within about two weeks (a temporal expectation).
- Assumption II: By closing campuses, typical gathering points are removed, disrupting the ability to continue agitation (a logistical expectation).
Concept / Approach:
- Crisis policies are justified by expected outcomes: diffusion of crowds and de-escalation over time.
- Both a time-based and a place-based rationale support the closure.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Assumption I: Without believing that a two-week pause helps calm tensions, choosing that duration would be arbitrary.Assumption II: The closure targets the primary venues where agitation coalesces; removing access is assumed to hinder momentum.
Verification / Alternative check:
If either assumption fails—e.g., the agitation persists regardless of time or easily shifts off-campus—the policy’s effectiveness is undermined. Having both provides the coherent rationale for the immediate closure.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I or Only II ignores one leg of the policy logic. Either / Neither do not reflect the dual expectations behind such emergency measures.
Common Pitfalls:
Assuming the measure must solve root causes; here it is designed to de-escalate and disrupt organization in the short term.
Final Answer:
Both I and II are implicit
Discussion & Comments