Explanation

It's hard to look at this question without taking in the question and the data statements in a preliminary way all in one go. This question is going to be a perfect fit for analysis by cases, because it's a situation of confusing-looking algebra but not great overall complexity. Let's turn to the data statements, separately first.

We'll evaluate Statement (1) by cases. Case I: a, b, and c are all 1. That's a permitted case, because in that case . In that case, it's also true that . Case II: . That case is equally allowed by Statement (1), because it gives , but it gives a different answer to the question, because . Therefore, we cannot answer the question definitively. Statement (1) is insufficient.

Statement (2) is insufficient based on similar analysis by cases. Now in one case and in another case. Insufficient.

When we combine the statements, we get to keep the case that a, b, and c are all 1. The other cases that we had already come up with are no longer allowed. Can we come up with a new case allowed by both statements that give an answer in which ? With fresh in the mind, we consider . In that case, Statement (1) would require . And if , Statement (2) would require . We have now chosen variable values so that both statements are satisfied, so it's an allowed case: . And in this case, = , so . Once again, we have come up with two permitted cases yielding different answers to the question, so we don't have sufficient information.

The correct answer is (E).