Educator: Only those students who are genuinely curious about a topic can successfully learn about that topic. They find the satisfaction of their curiosity intrinsically gratifying, and appreciate the inherent rewards of the learning process itself. However, almost no child enters the classroom with sufficient curiosity to learn successfully all that the teacher must instill. A teacher’s job, therefore, _______.

Summary

For students to successfully learn about a topic, they must be genuinely curious about that topic. These students find satisfaction of curiosity gratifying. However, almost no child enters the classroom with sufficient curiosity to successfully learn all that must be taught.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

A teacher’s job, therefore, requires stimulating and satisfying a student’s curiosity.

A
requires for the fulfillment of its goals the stimulation as well as the satisfaction of curiosity

This answer is strongly supported. Curiosity is a necessary condition for students to successfully learn a topic.

B
necessitates the creative use of rewards that are not inherent in the learning process itself

This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus whether the use of rewards is necessary for stimulating curiosity or successfully learning a topic.

C
is to focus primarily on those topics that do not initially interest the students

This answer is unsupported. The stimulus does not suggest what topics teachers should or should not focus on.

D
is facilitated by students’ taking responsibility for their own learning

This answer is unsupported. The stimulus does not suggest whether students have any responsibility for their own learning.

E
becomes easier if students realize that some learning is not necessarily enjoyable

This answer is unsupported. The stimulus does not suggest at what point a teacher’s job becomes easier.


12 comments

Criminologist: A judicial system that tries and punishes criminals without delay is an effective deterrent to violent crime. Long, drawn-out trials and successful legal maneuvering may add to criminals’ feelings of invulnerability. But if potential violent criminals know that being caught means prompt punishment, they will hesitate to break the law.

Summarize Argument
The criminologist concludes that an efficient, fast judicial system is an effective deterrent against violent crime. This is because long trials with many legal avenues make criminals feel invulnerable, while prompt punishment makes criminals hesitate before committing crimes.

Notable Assumptions
The criminologist assumes that criminals actually give some thought to the violent crimes they’re about to commit. The criminologist must therefore believe that most violent crimes are premeditated rather than spontaneous.

A
It is in the nature of violent crime that it is not premeditated.
Violent crimes aren’t premeditated. What criminals think about their potential crimes doesn’t really matter. Thus, the difference in trial lengths is unimportant, and certainly not a deterrent.
B
About one-fourth of all suspects first arrested for a crime are actually innocent.
We don’t care if some people are innocent. We simply need to know if trial length can deter violent crime.
C
Many violent crimes are committed by first-time offenders.
It doesn’t matter if these are first-time offenders or repeat offenders. We’re concerned with if trial length deters violent crime.
D
Everyone accused of a crime has the right to a trial.
The criminologist never says some people shouldn’t have trials. She simply states that quicker trials deter violent crime.
E
Countries that promptly punish suspected lawbreakers have lower crime rates than countries that allow long trials.
This seems to support the criminologist’s argument. We need to weaken the connection between trial length and violent crime.

14 comments

The question stem reads: Each of the following arguments exhibits flawed reasoning similar to that in the argument above EXCEPT… This is a Parallel Flaw question.

The author states that each of the smallest particles in the universe has an “elegantly simple structure.” Since the universe is composed of these particles, the author concludes that the universe also has an “elegantly simple structure.” The argument makes a fallacy of composition (part to whole). Just because a part or all of the parts have a particular property, the property does not necessarily carry over to the whole. By a similar line of reasoning, we could conclude that because the parts of a car cannot move on their own, and a car is composed of those parts, the car itself must not be able to move.

Because this is an except question, the wrong answer choices will contain a fallacy of composition. The right answer choice could exhibit some other fallacy or be a valid argument.

Answer Choice (A) is incorrect. (A) matches the stimulus by saying that because the parts of a car have the property of being perfectly engineered, then the car (the parts put together) must also have the property of being perfectly engineered. The car's parts may be well-engineered, but the car could be designed and assembled in a terrible fashion. Eliminate (A).

Correct Answer Choice (B) does make an argument from part to whole. However, (B) is not a fallacious argument. If every part of the desk is made of metal, then it must be true the desk is made of metal. While the properties of the parts do not necessarily carry over to the whole, sometimes they do. You must use your judgment to determine whether a “part to whole” argument works or is fallacious. Because (B) makes a good argument, (B) is our right answer.

Answer Choice (C) is incorrect. (C) matches the stimulus by saying because bricks have the property of being rectangular, the wall of bricks (the bricks put together) must have the property of being rectangular. What if the wall is built in a circle? Eliminate (C).

Answer Choice (D) is incorrect. (D) matches the stimulus by saying that because each piece of wood has the property of being sturdy, then the desk (the wood put together) must also have the property of being sturdy. Perhaps the stool was poorly put together. Eliminate (D).

Answer Choice (E) is incorrect. (E) matches our stimulus by saying that because each sentence of the novel has the property of being well constructed, the novel (all of the sentences put together) must also have the property of being well constructed. Eliminate (E).


9 comments

A recent epidemiological study found that businesspeople who travel internationally on business are much more likely to suffer from chronic insomnia than are businesspeople who do not travel on business. International travelers experience the stresses of dramatic changes in climate, frequent disruption of daily routines, and immersion in cultures other than their own, stresses not commonly felt by those who do not travel. Thus, it is likely that these stresses cause the insomnia.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis

The author hypothesizes that increased stress causes more insomnia in businesspeople who travel relative to those who don’t. This is because travelling exposes you to stressors that you wouldn’t have at home.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes that there isn’t some other factor that makes travelling businesspeople more likely to have insomnia. In other words, the author assumes that stress is the important factor here, and not something else—maybe people who travel for business have more demanding jobs, which makes them more prone to insomnia.

A
Most international travel for the sake of business occurs between countries with contiguous borders.

This does not affect the argument. Most business travel occurring between countries with contiguous borders doesn’t tell us about how similar those countries are culturally and climate-wise. We would have to make several assumptions for this to have any impact.

B
Some businesspeople who travel internationally greatly enjoy the changes in climate and immersion in another culture.

This does not affect the argument. It could be that people enjoy the experience but still feel the stresses described. Also, the argument claims travelling businesspeople are more likely to have insomnia—the author isn’t arguing that all of them do.

C
Businesspeople who already suffer from chronic insomnia are no more likely than businesspeople who do not to accept assignments from their employers that require international travel.

This strengthens the argument by addressing a potential alternative explanation for the phenomenon: that businesspeople who already have insomnia are more likely to travel than businesspeople who don’t have insomnia. This would mean the stress has nothing to do with it.

D
Experiencing dramatic changes in climate and disruption of daily routines through international travel can be beneficial to some people who suffer from chronic insomnia.

This does not affect the argument. (D) says people who already have insomnia may benefit from the stresses described. This is outside the scope of the causal mechanism described in the stimulus, which is that the stresses cause insomnia in the first place.

E
Some businesspeople who once traveled internationally but no longer do so complain of various sleep-related ailments.

This does not affect the argument. We don’t know if these ailments include insomnia, which is what we’re concerned with. Also, the stimulus only discusses stress as the cause of insomnia for travelling businesspeople—other people can have insomnia for other reasons.


34 comments

Artist: Avant-garde artists intend their work to challenge a society’s mainstream beliefs and initiate change. And some art collectors claim that an avant-garde work that becomes popular in its own time is successful. However, a society’s mainstream beliefs do not generally show any significant changes over a short period of time. Therefore, when an avant-garde work becomes popular it is a sign that the work is not successful, since it does not fulfil the intentions of its creator.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Avant-garde work that becomes popular in its own time is not successful, despite what some art collectors believe. Why? When avant-garde work becomes popular, it does not fulfill the intentions of the artist. The intentions of the artists are to challenge mainstream beliefs and initiate change. However, no such change could occur in a short period of time.

Identify Argument Part
The claim of some art collectors is what is being refuted. The art collectors think avant-garde work that becomes popular in its own time is successful, while the artist’s argument says no - that means the art is not successful.

A
It serves to bolster the argument’s main conclusion.
It is in opposition to the main conclusion. The main conclusion refutes it.
B
It identifies a view that is ultimately disputed by the argument.
The argument is dedicated to refuting/disputing this particular claim.
C
It identifies a position supported by the initial premise in the argument.
This position is given no support within the argument. The initial premise is used to support the opposite conclusion.
D
It provides support for the initial premise in the argument.
The claim provides no support for the other parts of the argument. The first premise stands alone, without any support.
E
It provides support for a counterargument to the initial premise.
This is a claim that is being refuted, and it doesn’t support anything else. Additionally, the initial premise is just a premise - the opposing arguments diverge on success, not the intentions of artists.

2 comments

Tea made from camellia leaves is a popular beverage. However, studies show that regular drinkers of camellia tea usually suffer withdrawal symptoms if they discontinue drinking the tea. Furthermore, regular drinkers of camellia tea are more likely than people in general to develop kidney damage. Regular consumption of this tea, therefore, can result in a heightened risk of kidney damage.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that regular consumption of camellia tea can lead to a heightened risk of kidney damage. She supports this claim by citing two studies: one showing that show camellia tea drinkers suffer withdrawal if they stop drinking the tea, and another showing that regular drinkers of camellia tea are more likely than most people to develop kidney damage.

Notable Assumptions
Based on a mere correlation between camellia tea drinking and kidney damage, the author concludes that the former causes the latter. This means she doesn’t believe the reverse is true (that people drink camellia tea because they have kidney damage, perhaps as a herbal remedy or as a substitute for kidney-damage beverages), nor that there’s some hidden third factor causing kidney damage and camellia tea drinking, or kidney damage in isolation.

A
Several other popular beverages contain the same addictive chemical that is found in camellia tea.
The author never says camellia tea is the only addictive beverage. We don’t care if other drinks are addictive, too.
B
Addictive chemicals are unlikely to cause kidney damage solely by virtue of their addictive qualities.
The author never said camellia tea is harmful because of its addictive qualities. The addictive qualities are simply why regular drinkers have a difficult time quitting.
C
Some people claim that regular consumption of camellia tea helps alleviate their stress.
This lists a benefit of camellia tea, but it doesn’t weaken the connection between regular drinking and kidney disease. We’re not trying to counterbalance the conclusion—we’re trying to weaken the connection.
D
Most people who regularly drink camellia tea do not develop kidney damage.
Even if most regular drinkers don’t develop kidney damage, camellia tea may still be linked to kidney damage. We already know regular drinkers are more susceptible to kidney damage than the general population.
E
Many people who regularly consume camellia tea also regularly consume other beverages suspected of causing kidney damage.
Camellia tea drinkers on the whole also drink other drinks, and those are also suspected of causing kidney damage. We don’t know which drink is actually responsible for kidney damage, so we can’t draw any conclusions about camellia tea.

37 comments