Loading...
The program to control the entry of illegal drugs into the country was a failure in 1987. If the program had been successful, the wholesale price of most illegal drugs would not have dropped substantially in 1987.
The argument in the passage depends on which of the following assumptions?
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| The program to control the entry of illegal drugs into the country was a failure in 1987. |
|
| If the program had been successful, the wholesale price of most illegal drugs would not have dropped substantially in 1987. |
|
The author starts with the conclusion that the drug control program failed, then provides the reasoning by explaining what should have happened if it had succeeded (drug prices shouldn't have dropped substantially).
The drug control program was a failure in 1987.
This uses contrapositive reasoning. The author assumes that if a drug control program works, it reduces supply and keeps prices from dropping substantially. Since prices did drop substantially in 1987, the program must have failed. The argument depends on the assumption that drug price changes directly reflect program effectiveness.
Assumption - We need to find what the author must believe to be true for their reasoning to work. The author concludes the program failed because drug prices dropped substantially.
The argument makes specific claims about program effectiveness (failure), price changes (substantial drop), and timing (1987). The key relationship is between program success and price stability.
For assumption questions, we identify ways the conclusion could be falsified while respecting the given facts. The author assumes that if prices dropped substantially, the program must have failed. We need to find what must be true for this logic to hold - essentially, what connects program failure to price drops.