Top Law Schools

This is if assumed problem.
Manhattan forum has several lengthy explanations on this question. (really lengthy. I don't think I would have enough time
to think like that on real test.)

I originally skipped this question, just picked D, and got it right. Well. I think that's a terrible approach unless
I can get lucky every time I pick a random alphabet. lol

As reviewing, I thought I should have approached this problem with finding out key clues like spacecraft
and being at lest as intelligent as humans.

How did you solve this problem??

Did you actually draw diagrams? first clue, second clue, and conclusion?

Or were you just able to see what's going on and pick the right answer?

Should I just try to look for key clues and make connections?

The assumption is always the connection between the premises and the conclusion. No diagrams necessary here. The conclusion of this argument is the 1st sentence, that if there are sentient beings on other planets, we will not be able to DETERMINE this unless some of these beings are as least at intelligent as humans.

The only answer choice that connects at all to the concept of "determining" whether aliens exist is answer choice D ("detect its existence"). So that's your winner in 30 easy seconds.

All other answer choices are easily eliminated.
A) Who cares about our solar system? The arg is about aliens outside our solar system. Out of scope.
B) Who cares about wanting? Whether they want to communicate with us is irrelevant. Out of scope.
C) Close (sort've). This one's actually in the scope of the argument, but doesn't directly connect to the conclusion.
E) Who cares about capability? Whether they are capable of communicating is irrelevant. Out of scope.

Good luck!

The argument "since we can't actually visit them, they'll need to be as smart as us to communicate to us" is just dumb as there are potentially alternatives. The best strategy here is to spot that flaw and find it in the answers.