The author divides workers into two groups: those doing creative work vs. "the other 66 percent." The key is understanding how he makes this division.

From passage: "roughly a third of us across the United States, and perhaps as much as half of us in our most creative cities are able to do work which engages our creative faculties to some extent, whether as artists, musicians, writers, techies, innovators, entrepreneurs, doctors, lawyers, journalists or educators those of us who work with our minds." The critical phrase is "those of us who work with our minds." This reveals the author's underlying assumption. Author's logic: Creative jobs = mental work → If creative work uses minds → Then non-creative work must use hands → Therefore, hand-work ≠ creative work

🟢 Option 1 → correct assumption → The phrase "work with our minds" directly implies that people who work with their hands are not doing creative work. This is the hidden assumption that lets him categorize jobs this way. 🟠 Option 2 → factual statement, not assumption → This is what the passage directly states (66% in non-creative jobs), but it's a conclusion based on his assumption, not the assumption itself. 🔴 Option 3 → extreme overstatement → Author never says only these groups should be valued - he's just categorizing who does creative work currently. 🟠 Option 4 → conclusion, not assumption → This describes what happens to low-wage workers, but it's a result of his categorization system, not the underlying belief that created the system. The tricky part: Options 2 and 4 describe what the author observes, but Option 1 reveals the mental framework that allows him to make these observations in the first place.

CAT (VARC) PYQs

Keyboard Shortcuts