Introduction / Context:
In assumption-based critical reasoning, we test what must be true for a decision or announcement to make sense. Here, Company X cuts prices of luxury cars. We must identify which hidden beliefs (assumptions) make that move reasonable.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- I: Sales of Company X’s luxury cars may increase after the price cut.
- II: Other luxury car makers may also reduce their prices.
- III: Competitor companies may not reduce their prices.
Concept / Approach:
- An assumption is necessary if the action would be pointless or irrational without it.
- Competitors’ future behavior (II or III) is speculative; the decision to cut prices need not depend on knowing rivals’ responses in advance.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Company X likely assumes a price cut will stimulate demand or expand market share. So I is necessary.Whether rivals also cut (II) or certainly do not (III) is not required for X’s unilateral decision. Either could happen, but neither is essential to justify X’s own move.
Verification / Alternative check:
If I were false (no sales lift), the cut risks revenue without benefit, making the action unreasonable. If II or III is false, the action can still be reasonable based on internal goals (e.g., inventory clearance, penetration pricing).
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I and II / Only I and III: add unnecessary conjectures about competitors. None: ignores the core demand-stimulation premise.
Common Pitfalls:
Confusing possible market reactions with necessary assumptions for the firm’s own pricing logic.
Final Answer:
Only I is implicit
Discussion & Comments