In this question, "Ed criticizes Ravi's argument by pointing out: [...]"
The highest priority should be given to the needs of the sales department, because without successful sales that company as a whole would fail.Ed:
There are several departments other than sales that must also function successfully for the company to succeed. It is impossible to give the highest priority to all of them."
(A) That the sales department taken by itself is not critical to the company's success as a whole.
(B) The ambiguity of the term "highest priority".(C) That the departments other than sales are more vital to the company's success.(D) An absurd consequence of its apparent assumption that a department's necessity earns it the highest priority.
(E) That Ravi makes a generalization from an atypical case.
I incorrectly answered (C) because I felt that this statement truly captures Ed's method of criticizing Ravi. Specifically, Ed tries to point out other aspects of a company that is vital for success, thus describing the logical reasoning of Ed. Could you please explain what is meant by "absurd consequence of its apparent assumption" found in answer (D)?