Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Recognizing Unstated Assumptions Questions and Answers 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Argument: 'This medication has been approved by the regulatory authority, so it is safe to take.' What is the key unstated assumption?
- The regulatory authority is funded by the government.
- Regulatory approval guarantees that the medication is safe for all people in all circumstances. (Correct answer)
- The medication was developed by a reputable pharmaceutical company.
- The regulatory authority tested the medication on a large sample.
Correct answer: Regulatory approval guarantees that the medication is safe for all people in all circumstances.
The argument assumes that regulatory approval equals comprehensive safety, when approvals are based on benefit-risk balance for specific populations and do not guarantee absence of side effects for all individuals.
Regulatory approval (such as by the FDA or EMA) means the agency determined that benefits outweigh risks for a defined population under specified conditions — it does not mean the drug is safe for everyone or free of side effects. The argument assumes approval = universal safety, which is the gap being filled. Drug safety is context-dependent (age, other medications, genetic factors), and post-market surveillance regularly identifies adverse effects not caught pre-approval. Options A and C introduce facts about the authority and company not implied by the argument. Option D is a methodological detail about testing, not the logical assumption bridging approval to safety.
Question 2: Argument: 'Since Andrea speaks three languages fluently, she will be an excellent translator.' What unstated assumption is the argument making?
- Andrea learned all three languages in school.
- Speaking multiple languages fluently is sufficient to be an excellent translator. (Correct answer)
- Translation is a common career in Andrea's country.
- Andrea has translated documents before.
Correct answer: Speaking multiple languages fluently is sufficient to be an excellent translator.
Translation requires not just language fluency but also subject knowledge, nuanced cultural understanding, and specialized skills not implied by speaking multiple languages.
The argument assumes that fluency in multiple languages is the only or sufficient requirement for excellent translation. In reality, translation is a specialized professional skill that additionally requires: domain expertise (legal, medical, technical), understanding of register and cultural context, ability to convey meaning equivalently rather than literally, and often specific translator training. Many multilingual individuals are not good translators, and many excellent translators specialize in particular fields. The assumption bridging 'three languages fluently' to 'excellent translator' is that language fluency is sufficient for translation excellence.
Question 3: Argument: 'The new park reduced noise complaints in the neighborhood, so it must have reduced noise levels.' What unstated assumption is this making?
- The park was built using government funds.
- Residents report noise complaints in proportion to actual noise levels they experience. (Correct answer)
- Noise complaints were the primary motivation for building the park.
- The park is open 24 hours a day.
Correct answer: Residents report noise complaints in proportion to actual noise levels they experience.
Complaint rates may fall for reasons other than reduced noise — residents may have given up complaining, moved away, or become habituated to noise levels that haven't actually changed.
The argument moves from 'fewer complaints' to 'lower actual noise levels.' This requires the assumption that complaints accurately track actual noise levels — that when noise falls, complaints fall, and vice versa. But complaint rates are influenced by many other factors: community fatigue with complaining, changes in who lives nearby (residents who moved in may be less sensitive), administrative barriers to filing complaints, or loss of trust in whether complaints are acted upon. If complaints fell for these reasons rather than actual noise reduction, the conclusion is false. This is the key unstated assumption the argument depends on.
Question 4: Argument: 'Lowering interest rates will stimulate the economy by encouraging businesses to borrow and invest.' What is the key unstated assumption?
- The central bank controls interest rates.
- Businesses are currently not investing because borrowing costs are too high, and lower rates will change this decision. (Correct answer)
- Lower interest rates benefit consumers more than businesses.
- The government approves all central bank decisions.
Correct answer: Businesses are currently not investing because borrowing costs are too high, and lower rates will change this decision.
The argument assumes that borrowing cost is the binding constraint on business investment — if businesses aren't investing due to demand uncertainty or poor profit prospects, lower rates may not stimulate investment.
The monetary policy transmission mechanism assumes that businesses are not investing primarily because borrowing costs are too high. If the constraint is instead insufficient demand (businesses don't see customers for their products), poor profit expectations, regulatory uncertainty, or over-leveraging, then lower interest rates do not address the binding constraint and may have little effect. This is the 'liquidity trap' scenario recognized by economists. The key assumption is that interest rate sensitivity is the dominant reason for current underinvestment. Option A is a factual background condition, not the logical assumption. Options C and D are tangential to the argument's structure.
Question 5: Argument: 'If you want to be healthy, you should follow this celebrity's diet plan.' What unstated assumption is the argument making?
- The celebrity is paid to endorse the diet plan.
- Being healthy is desirable and should be a goal for everyone.
- The diet plan that works for this celebrity will produce similar health results for others. (Correct answer)
- The celebrity developed the diet plan themselves.
Correct answer: The diet plan that works for this celebrity will produce similar health results for others.
The argument assumes that what produces health outcomes for this celebrity's body, lifestyle, and metabolism will generalize to others — ignoring individual variation in metabolism, health conditions, and activity levels.
The celebrity diet argument assumes that the diet's results are generalizable: what works for the celebrity (in terms of their specific metabolism, caloric needs, activity level, medical history, and lifestyle) will work similarly for the intended audience. Individual physiological differences make blanket dietary recommendations potentially inappropriate or even harmful. Option A is a motivational fact about the endorsement, not the logical assumption underlying the health claim. Option B assumes health is universally desirable — while broadly accepted, it's not the logical gap in this particular argument. Option D addresses authorship, which is irrelevant to the health recommendation's logic.
Question 6: Argument: 'This country needs more hospitals because its population has grown significantly over the last decade.' What unstated assumption is this making?
- Hospitals are more expensive to build now than they were a decade ago.
- The existing hospital capacity was sufficient for the previous population size but is now insufficient for the larger population. (Correct answer)
- Population growth is always accompanied by increased infectious disease.
- The government is responsible for building hospitals.
Correct answer: The existing hospital capacity was sufficient for the previous population size but is now insufficient for the larger population.
The argument assumes that existing hospital capacity matched previous needs and that the population increase has created a shortfall — if hospitals were already over-capacity or under-capacity previously, the argument changes.
The argument concludes that more hospitals are needed based on population growth. This requires assuming that hospitals were previously adequate and that the growth has now created a capacity gap. If hospitals were already under-utilized, population growth might not create unmet need. Alternatively, if hospitals were severely under-resourced previously, population growth is just one of many factors requiring expansion. The key logical bridge is: previous population → previous capacity was adequate → new population has exceeded that capacity. Option A introduces cost factors not implied by the argument. Option C introduces a causal claim about disease that is not the argument's assumption. Option D raises governance, not the logical assumption about capacity.
