Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author rejects the paleobiologists’ belief that all dinosaurs were cold-blooded. Since some dinosaurs lived in places where only warm-blooded animals could survive, the author implies that some dinosaurs must have been warm-blooded.
Identify Argument Part
It’s a premise. The author uses the claim that only warm-blooded animals could survive in those areas to prove that the dinosaurs that lived in those areas were not cold-blooded.
A
It is presented as a potential counterexample to the argument’s main conclusion.
The last sentence supports the conclusion, so it can’t be a counter-example to it.
B
It is a premise offered in support of the argument’s main conclusion.
This accurately describes the role of the last sentence. It’s a premise supporting the author’s conclusion.
C
It is presented as counterevidence to the paleobiologists’ assertion that dinosaurs lack turbinates.
The author never suggests that dinosaurs actually have turbinates. The claim that the author counters is the paleobiologists’ claim that all dinosaurs were cold-blooded.
D
It is the argument’s main conclusion.
The main conclusion is the claim that the paleobiologists are wrong. The last sentence supports that conclusion.
E
It is an intermediate conclusion for which the claim that some dinosaur species lived in Australia and Alaska is offered as support.
The claim that some dinosaurs lived in Australia and Alaska isn’t offered to help prove that only warm-blooded animals can live in freezing temperatures.
Summary
Outsiders believe they can provide new solutions in fields they are unfamiliar with, but they are wrong. Creativity without relevant experience is useless. Effective problem-solving requires a deep understanding of the problems, which is gained through experience.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Problem-solving requires experience (or any valid inference along this chain)
Problem solved —> have understanding —> experience in the field.
Problem solved —> have understanding —> experience in the field.
A
The more experience a person has in a field, the more creatively that person can solve problems in the field.
The stimulus does not say that more experience leads to more creativity. It only argues that creativity without experience is useless.
B
Those people who are experienced in a field rarely overlook creative solutions.
This is too strong to support. The stimulus argues that only experienced individuals can provide creative solutions, not that they always possess creative solutions.
C
Creative solutions in a field always come from people with experience in that field.
The stimulus explains that creativity without experience is useless, and problems can be solved only by people who understand them. Thus, creative solutions must come from people with experience.
D
The experience required for effective problem-solving in a field does not vary depending on the field’s complexity.
The stimulus does not mention whether experience differs based on the field’s complexity. You must make a number of assumptions to make this work.
E
Outsiders should be properly trained in a field before being given responsibility in that field.
The stimulus does not say anything about when to give outsiders responsibility. The stimulus is purely focused on the requirements to come up with creative solutions.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the lack of managerial skills and the lack of entrepreneurial ability can each hinder development of successful companies. This is because entrepreneurial ability is required to start a successful company, and because bad managerial skills can lead to failure after a company has been started.
Identify Argument Part
The referenced text is an example of how bad managerial skills can lead to failure of a company after it has started.
A
It is the main conclusion drawn in the argument.
The referenced text is offered as support for the conclusion. It is not the conclusion itself.
B
It is presented as an example of the phenomenon the argument seeks to explain.
Although the referenced text is an example, the argument isn’t trying to explain a phenomenon. The argument is trying to establish that lack of certain skills can hinder development of successful companies.
C
It is meant as an aside and is not supposed to provide evidence in support of the argument’s conclusion.
The referenced text is offered as support. It’s not an irrelevant side comment.
D
It is a premise that is intended to support the argument’s main conclusion directly.
The referenced text does not support the main conclusion directly; only indirectly. It’s an example supporting the claim that many entrepreneurs fail after starting a company because they lack managerial skills. This claim in turn supports the main conclusion.
E
It is an example that is offered in support of a premise that is intended to support the argument’s main conclusion directly.
This accurately describes the role. It is an example of the premise that many entrepreneurs fail for lack of managerial skills. This premise in turn supports the conclusion that both a lack of managerial skills and the lack of entrepreneurial ability are bad for companies.
Summary
Most skilled banjo players are also skilled guitar players. However, most skilled guitar players are not skilled banjo players.
Notable Valid Inferences
There are more skilled guitar players than skilled banjo players.
A
There are more people who are skilled at playing both the guitar and the banjo than there are people who are skilled at playing only one of the two instruments.
Must be false. There must be more people who are skilled guitar players but not skilled banjo players.
B
A person trying to learn how to play the guitar is more likely to succeed in doing so than is a person trying to learn how to play the banjo.
Could be false. The stimulus does not give us any information about which group is more likely to succeed. It is possible that more people are likely to succeed at playing the banjo, but the banjo just isn’t as popular.
C
Playing the guitar takes more skill than playing the banjo does.
Could be false. The stimulus does not give us any information about what instrument requires more skill. It is possible that playing the banjo requires more skill.
D
There are more people who are skilled at playing the guitar than there are people who are skilled at playing the banjo.
Must be true. This is the only way it could both be true that most skilled banjo players are skilled guitar players and that not most skilled guitar players are banjo players.
E
There are more people who are skilled at playing the banjo than there are people who are skilled at playing the guitar.
Must be false. There must be more people who are skilled guitar players but not skilled banjo players.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that the critics’ claim is false. The author supports this with the fact that the critics’ claim is based on data that is flawed.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author mistakenly assumes that a conclusion based on flawed data cannot be true. This overlooks the distinction between lack of support and a false conclusion. Although the critics’ claim might not be supported well due to flawed evidence, the claim could still be true.
A
infers that a claim is false merely on the grounds that no satisfactory evidence for it has been offered
The author infers that the critics’ claim is false merely on the grounds that the data offered for it is unsatisfactory (because it was flawed). This reasoning is flawed because the critics’ claim can still be true despite being based on bad data.
B
fails to consider that a pejorative claim that is true can be more harmful to a person’s reputation than a false claim
The author’s conclusion didn’t say that the critics’ claim is more harmful to the moviemakers’ reputations than some other kind of claim. So the possibility (B) describes doesn’t affect the argument.
C
relies on a sample that is likely to be unrepresentative
The author’s premise asserts that the data underlying the critics’ study was flawed. Pointing out the evidence underlying someone else’s argument is flawed doesn’t constitute using a sample.
D
attacks the persons making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument
The author doesn’t attack the critics. She attacks the critics’ data underlying their conclusion.
E
fails to consider that, even if an argument’s conclusion is false, some of the evidence used to justify that conclusion may nonetheless be true
The problem with the author’s argument is that she hasn’t shown the critics’ conclusion is false. So an answer that points out what might be true if the critics’ conclusion is false doesn’t undermine the argument. We want to point out why the critics’ conclusion might be true.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that university graduates are more likely to be in favor of retaining or increasing social services than the overall population. As evidence, she cites polls showing that graduating university students view social services more favorably than incoming students.
Notable Assumptions
The author believes hat since graduating university students view social services favorably, people with university education view social services favorably. She therefore assumes people don’t change their views on social services sometime after graduating. The author also assumes that incoming university students are representative of the general population, without considering people who never attend university.
A
The polls of graduating university students were designed to avoid overrepresenting any single academic discipline.
This strengthens the author’s argument. The polls weren’t skewed any one way.
B
The political views of people with a university education are to a large degree influenced by their professors, and university professors are usually against reducing government social services.
Like (A), this strengthens the author’s argument. If people with a university education are strongly influenced by their pro-social service professors, then they likely are more in favor of social services than the general population.
C
Polls of retired persons who have not graduated from a university show a higher percentage of persons in favor of reducing government social services than do polls of retired persons who have graduated from a university.
This supports the author’s argument. Later in life, people with no university education are more likely in favor of cutting social services than people with a university education.
D
Polls of those who graduated from a university more than five years before being polled show a higher percentage of people in favor of reducing government social services than do polls of the overall population.
While graduating students are disproportionately in favor of social services, these views change within five years of graduation. Thus, people with a university education actually aren’t more likely than average to be in favor of social services.
E
In the polls cited, graduating university students were more likely to express strong opinions about the question of reducing government social services than were students entering a university.
We don’t care who has strong opinions on the issue. We simply care how favorably they view retaining or increasing social services.
Columnist: Some people argue that the government should not take over failing private-sector banks because the government does not know how to manage financial institutions. However, rather than managing a bank’s day-to-day operations, the government would just need to select the bank’s senior management. Most politicians have never been military professionals, yet they appoint the top military officials entrusted with defending the country—at least as great a responsibility as managing a bank.
Summary
Some people argue the government should not take over failing private-sector banks because the government does not know how to manage financial institutions. However, the government would just need to select the bank’s senior management, not manage day-to-day operations. Most politicians have never been military professionals, yet they appoint the top military officials. This is at least as great a responsibility as managing a bank.
Notable Valid Inferences
Managing the military requires more knowledge than managing a private-sector bank does.
Government-owned banks can be well managed.
Politicians do an acceptable job when appointing top military officials to defend the country.
A
Commanding a branch of the military requires greater knowledge than running a bank does.
Could be true. The Columnist tells us that appointing top military officials is as least as great a responsibility as managing a bank. It is possible that commanding a military branch requires greater knowledge if it requires as much or more responsibility.
B
Politicians do an adequate job of appointing the top military officials entrusted with defending the country.
Could be true. The Columnist tells us that appointing top military officials is as least as great a responsibility as managing a bank in order to support their main conclusion. It is consistent for the Columnist to believe that politicians do an adequate job.
C
Politicians are not capable of managing a bank’s day-to-day operations.
Could be true. It is possible that the Columnist believes politicians are not capable of managing day-to-day operations, but the Columnist claims that politicians would not have to do this anyway. Instead, the politicians would select senior management.
D
Banks that are owned by the government cannot be well managed.
Must be false. This answer choice directly contradicts the Columnist’s argument in the stimulus. The Columnists is arguing against the people who claim the government should not take over failing private-sector banks.
E
The government should not take over private-sector banks that are financially sound.
Could be true. The argument in the stimulus is restricted to government takeover of failing private-sector banks. It is possible the Columnist believes the government should not take over private banks that are financially stable.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that Joshi’s vote is being influenced by campaign contributions. This is based on the fact that Joshi’s re-election campaign has received more money from property developers than any other city councilor’s campaign. In addition, Joshi’s voting record favors property developers’ interest more than does the voting record of any other city councilor.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that Joshi’s favorable voting record for the property developers is a result of campaign contributions from the developers. But we don’t know which came first. It’s possible the developers contribute to Joshi because of Joshi’s votes. This opens the possibility that Joshi’s votes aren’t influenced by the contributions; he might be voting favorably to the developers for other reasons.
A
takes for granted that because certain events occurred sequentially, the earlier events caused the later events
The author doesn’t argue that Joshi is being influenced by campaign contributions because his votes occurred after the contributions. (In fact, we don’t know whether the votes occurred after the contributions.)
B
confuses one thing’s being necessary for another to occur with its being sufficient to make it occur
The argument isn’t based on conditional reasoning, so there is no confusion of sufficient and necessary conditions.
C
makes a moral judgment when only a factual judgment can be justified
The conclusion is not a moral judgment. A claim that someone is influenced by campaign contributions is simply a claim about cause and effect. It doesn’t involve a moral judgment.
D
presumes that one thing is the cause of another when it could easily be an effect of it
The author assumes that the contributions are a cause of Joshi’s votes that are favorable to property developers, but these contributions could be a result of Joshi’s votes. Maybe Joshi voted favorably first, and the contributions followed.
E
has a conclusion that is simply a restatement of one of the argument’s stated premises
(E) describes circular reasoning. The author’s conclusion — that contributions influence Joshi’s vote — isn’t restated in the premises. None of the premises assert that Joshi’s vote is affected by contributions.
Summarize Argument
Technology is greatly improving some communities’ quality of life, and this improvement is not only because of the direct application of innovations. The design, production, testing, and marketing of new technology has become a thriving industry revitalizing struggling communities. These companies also boost employment and generate tax revenue, fostering positive morale.
Identify Conclusion
Technology is greatly improving some communities’ quality of life, and this improvement is not just because of the direct application of innovations: “Technology is radically improving the quality of life in some communities, and not only by direct application of innovations.”
A
The direct application of innovations is not the only way in which technology is radically improving the quality of life in some communities.
This rephrases the conclusion.
B
The design, production, testing, and marketing of new technology has itself become a growing industry that is turning around the fortunes of once-ailing communities.
This is a premise. It supports the conclusion that the direct application of innovations is not the only way technology is improving the quality of life in some communities.
C
Companies involved in the design, production, testing, and marketing of new technology create jobs, add to the tax base, and contribute to an upbeat spirit of renewal.
This is a premise. It supports the conclusion that the direct application of innovations is not the only way technology is improving the quality of life in some communities.
D
Either the creation or the direct application of technological innovations is radically improving the quality of life in most communities.
(D) makes a claim about “most” communities, when the argument only discusses “some” communities. This is enough to eliminate (D).
E
The only ways in which technology is radically improving the quality of life in some communities are by creating jobs, adding to the tax base, and contributing to an upbeat spirit of renewal.
This is false. The direct application of innovations, as well as the design, production, testing, and marketing of new technology, contributes to radically improving the quality of life in some communities.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that it’s sometimes environmentally preferable to buy non-locally produced food than to buy locally produced food. This is because the distance that food travels makes up only a small part of the food’s environmental impact. And, some locations allow production of certain foods with far less environmental impact. For example, maybe coffee production in South America causes less damage to the environment than coffee production in North America. In this case, getting coffee from South America might be less damaging than getting it from North America, even if North American coffee is local.
Identify Argument Part
The referenced text is the view that the author rejects.
A
It is a principle upon which the reasoning in the argument is based.
The referenced text does not support the author’s conclusion. It’s the view the conclusion rejects.
B
It is a general principle that is used to support a particular activity that falls under it.
The author does not describe any particular activity supported by the first sentence. The referenced text is a view that the author rejects.
C
It is a general principle that is used to reject a particular activity that is not compatible with it.
The author does not use the referenced text to reject an activity. It describes the activity that the author rejects.
D
It is a view that is rejected by the argument.
This accurately describes the role of the referenced text. Some think it’s environmentally better to buy local food whenever possible. The author concludes that this is not true.
E
It is the conclusion of the argument.
The referenced text is the view the author rejects. The conclusion is the rejection of this view.