Sociologist: Climate and geology determine where human industry can be established. Drastic shifts in climate always result in migrations, and migrations bring about the intermingling of ideas necessary for rapid advances in civilization.

Summary

The location of human industry is a product of climate and geology. Large changes in climate always result in migrations. Migrations cause intermingling of ideas. The intermingling of ideas is necessary for rapid advances in civilization.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

If there is no intermingling of ideas, then the climate is not changing drastically. If there are no migrations, then there are no drastic changes in the climate.

A
Climate is the primary cause of migration.

This is unsupported because although climate changes are sufficient to produce migration, they may not be the only condition sufficient to produce migration.

B
All shifts in climate produce a net gain in human progress.

This is unsupported because while shifts in the climate will lead to an intermingling of ideas, we don’t know if these are net positive for human progress. Also, these ideas are necessary but not sufficient for advances in civilization.

C
A population remains settled only where the climate is fairly stable.

This is strongly supported because the author states that large changes in the climate always result in migrations. The contrapositive says that if there are no migrations (the population is settled) then the climate is not largely changing (the climate is fairly stable).

D
Populations settle in every place where human industry can be established.

This is unsupported because it is possible that human industry can be established in places where there is an intermingling of ideas as a result of migration.

E
Every migration is accompanied by rapid advances in civilization.

This is unsupported because while we know that migrations lead to intermingling of ideas, the intermingling of ideas is a necessary, not sufficient, condition for bringing about advances in civilization.


46 comments

Some educators claim that it is best that school courses cover only basic subject matter, but cover it in depth. These educators argue that if students achieve a solid grasp of the basic concepts and investigatory techniques in a subject, they will be able to explore the breadth of that subject on their own after the course is over. But if they simply learn a lot of factual information, without truly understanding its significance, they will not be well equipped for further study on their own.

Summary
Some educators claim that it is best for school courses to cover only basic subject matter in depth. These educators claim that if students solidly grasp the basic concepts of a subject, then those students will be able to explore that subject broadly when the course is over. But if students simply learn a lot of facts without understanding the significance, students will not be prepared for additional study on their own.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
It is easier for a student to study a subject broadly after studying the basics of that subject in detail.

A
It is easier to understand how plants and animals are classified after learning how plants and animals can be useful.
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know how the connection between “classified” and useful” compares to understanding the basics of a subject in order to study that subject in depth. We don’t know if “classified” and “useful” have the same depth versus breadth relationship.
B
It is more difficult to recall the details of a dull and complicated lecture than of a lively and interesting one.
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus how difficult or easy grasping the concepts of a dull subject would be compared to an interesting subject.
C
It is easier to remember new ideas explained personally by a teacher than ideas that one explores independently.
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus what factors would make remembering new ideas easier. The educators’ claims are regarding the best way for school courses to cover subject matter.
D
It is easier to understand any Greek tragedy after one has analyzed a few of them in detail.
This answer is strongly supported. This scenario fits the educators’ idea that if students were to study a few components of a subject in depth, those students would be able to study the subject broadly.
E
It is easier to learn many simple ideas well than to learn a few complicated ideas well.
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus what kind of details are easier to learn for students.

83 comments

Recent research indicates that increased consumption of fruits and vegetables by middle-aged people reduces their susceptibility to stroke in later years. The researchers speculate that this may be because fruits and vegetables are rich in folic acid. Low levels of folic acid are associated with high levels of homocysteine, an amino acid that contributes to blocked arteries.

Summary
Some research shows that increased consumption of fruits and veggies reduces susceptibility to stroke later in life. Researchers think this is because fruits and veggies have a lot of folic acid. Low levels of folic acid are correlated with high levels of homocysteine, which causes blocked arteries.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
High levels of folic acid are correlated with low levels of homocysteine, low arterial blockage, and less likelihood of stroke. (The stimulus told us what low levels of folic acid are correlated with as part of an explanation of a potential causal connection between high folic acid and less susceptibility to stroke.)

A
An increased risk of stroke is correlated with low levels of homocysteine.
Antisupported. Low folic acid is correlated with high homocysteine, which blocks arteries. Since researchers suspect that fruits and veggies may lower risk of stroke through folic acid, this means high folic acid should be associated with low homocysteine and low risk of stroke.
B
A decreased risk of stroke is correlated with increased levels of folic acid.
Strongly supported. Researchers think fruits and veggies lower risk of stroke through folic acid. This suggests high folic acid is associated with low homocysteine and lower risk of stroke.
C
An increased propensity for blocked arteries is correlated with decreased levels of homocysteine.
Antisupported. Low folic acid is correlated with high homocysteine, which blocks arteries. This suggests high folic acid is correlated with lower levels of homocysteine and less likelihood of blocked arteries.
D
A decreased propensity for blocked arteries is correlated with low levels of folic acid.
Antisupported. Low folic acid is correlated with high homocysteine, which blocks arteries.
E
Stroke is prevented by ingestion of folic acid in quantities sufficient to prevent a decline in the levels of homocysteine.
Antisupported. High homocysteine is associated with greater arterial blockage. So, lower homocysteine is likely better for reducing stroke than is higher homocysteine. To prevent strokes, we want a decline in homocysteine.

16 comments

Mystery stories often feature a brilliant detective and the detective’s dull companion. Clues are presented in the story, and the companion wrongly infers an inaccurate solution to the mystery using the same clues that the detective uses to deduce the correct solution. Thus, the author’s strategy of including the dull companion gives readers a chance to solve the mystery while also diverting them from the correct solution.

Summary
Many mystery stories include a genius detective, a “dull” companion, and some clues. The detective uses the clues to solve the mystery, while the companion misinterprets the clues and comes to the wrong solution. In this type of mystery story, the use of the companion character allows readers to solve the mystery, but also diverts them from the true solution.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
The stimulus lets us conclude that:
Some clues in mystery stories can suggest both accurate and inaccurate solutions to the mystery.
Some mystery stories give the reader enough clues to solve the mystery.
Some mystery authors make decisions about what kinds of characters to include as a strategy to allow the reader to participate in solving the mystery.

A
Most mystery stories feature a brilliant detective who solves the mystery presented in the story.
This is not supported. The stimulus says that mystery stories “often” feature such a detective, but that’s not enough to be certain that “most” mystery stories use this technique.
B
Mystery readers often solve the mystery in a story simply by spotting the mistakes in the reasoning of the detective’s dull companion in that story.
This is not supported. The facts above don’t explain how readers go about solving the mystery in a story. All we know is that it’s sometimes possible for them to do so, which does not support concluding that they use this particular strategy.
C
Some mystery stories give readers enough clues to infer the correct solution to the mystery.
This is strongly supported. The stimulus says that some mystery stories give readers a chance to solve the mystery by including a dull companion. So, the stories must contain enough clues for the reader to infer the solution, or else they wouldn’t actually have a chance.
D
The actions of the brilliant detective in a mystery story rarely divert readers from the actions of the detective’s dull companion.
This is not supported. We don’t know from the stimulus how much attention readers typically give to either the detective or the companion in mystery stories, so we can’t say if one does or doesn’t divert from the other.
E
The detective’s dull companion in a mystery story generally uncovers the misleading clues that divert readers from the mystery’s correct solution.
This is not supported. The stimulus doesn’t indicate where the clues in mystery novels usually come from, or who uncovers them. We don’t know if it’s the companion, the detective, or someone else.

49 comments

Essayist: Only happiness is intrinsically valuable; other things are valuable only insofar as they contribute to happiness. Some philosophers argue that the fact that we do not approve of a bad person’s being happy shows that we value happiness only when it is deserved. This supposedly shows that we find something besides happiness to be intrinsically valuable. But the happiness people deserve is determined by the amount of happiness they bring to others. Therefore, _______.

Summary

Only happiness is intrinsically valuable. Other things are valuable only if they contribute to happiness. Some philosophers say the fact that we don’t approve of a bad person being happy shows we only value happiness when it is deserved. They say this shows something other than happiness can have intrinsic value. But however much happiness people deserve is determined by how much they bring happiness to others.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

The fact that we don’t approve of a bad person being happy is a product of the fact that happiness has intrinsic value.

A
the notion that people can be deserving of happiness is ultimately incoherent

This is unsupported because the author does not contest the idea that people can be deserving of happiness. The author is instead examining why we say some people don’t deserve happiness.

B
people do not actually value happiness as much as they think they do

This is unsupported because the author provides no means of addressing how much people value happiness or how much they think they value happiness.

C
the judgment that a person deserves to be happy is itself to be understood in terms of happiness

This is strongly supported because the author implies that whether someone deserves happiness is a product of how much happiness they bring to others.

D
the only way to be assured of happiness is to bring happiness to those who have done something to deserve it

This is unsupported because the author doesn’t tell us what happens if we bring happiness to someone who deserves it, nor does the author tell us how to guarantee our happiness.

E
a truly bad person cannot actually be very happy

This is unsupported because while the author implies that a bad person may not be bringing happiness to others, this wouldn’t necessarily prevent that person from experiencing happiness.


36 comments