Of all the food we buy, bread suffers the worst fate when it comes to waste. 32% of it ends up being thrown away. We value other types of food a lot more, as the average for all food and drink being wasted is 15%. The proportion of meat and fish thrown away is below average (13%) and our most precious item is alcohol - we throw away just 6% of it. Which one of the following is an underlying assumption of the above argument?
Full explanation
The underlying assumption of the argument is that the value we place on food influences how much of it we waste. The argument compares bread (which is wasted the most) to alcohol (which is wasted the least) and other foods in terms of how much is thrown away.
Option A Explanation:
A) Bread is a low-quality food.
This is not necessarily true, and the argument does not make a claim about the quality of bread. The focus is on how much we value different foods, not their quality.
Option B Explanation:
B) We should be more moderate when it comes to buying bread.
This is a suggestion, not an assumption of the argument.
Option C Explanation:
C) The more expensive a food or drink is, the less likely it is that it will be wasted.
This might be true in some cases, but the argument does not explicitly focus on the cost of food or drink, only the value placed on them.
Option D Explanation:
D) Bread goes stale faster so is more likely to be thrown away.
While this could explain some of the waste, the argument does not mention the freshness or shelf life of bread as the cause for its higher waste rate.
Option E Explanation:
E) The main reason why we throw food away is that we do not value it much.
This is the best assumption. The argument suggests that the more we value something, the less we waste it (alcohol is thrown away the least, while bread, which is seemingly less valued, is wasted the most).
A critical-reasoning assumption is an unstated premise the argument needs in order for its conclusion to follow — it is not just any true-sounding fact about the topic. When an argument draws a conclusion from a pattern in the evidence (here, that less-valued items get wasted more), the assumption is usually the general causal or explanatory link that would have to hold for that pattern to support the conclusion in the first place. A good way to test a candidate assumption is to imagine it were false: if the argument would then fall apart, it was genuinely required.