Summarize Argument
The columnist concludes that older studies claiming that nonstrenuous walking lowers one’s chances of developing cardio-respiratory illness should be ignored. As evidence, she cites a recent research report which found that only vigorous exercise has this result.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The columnist implicitly assumes that because the recent research report is newer, it must be more accurate than the older studies. However, she never actually provides any evidence for why the recent research is correct and the older studies are wrong.
A
fails to consider the possibility that the risk of developing certain cardio-respiratory illnesses can be reduced by means other than exercise
The columnist doesn’t fail to consider this possibility. She probably knows that other factors like diet or smoking affect one’s risk of cardio-respiratory illness, but she’s only discussing the effect of strenuous versus nonstrenuous exercise.
B
fails to consider that those who exercise vigorously are at increased risk of physical injury caused by exercise
The columnist is only arguing that vigorous exercise reduces one’s risk of cardio-respiratory illness. Whether it also increases one’s risk of physical injury is irrelevant.
C
overlooks the possibility that vigorous exercise may prevent life-endangering diseases that have little to do with the cardio-respiratory system
The columnist’s argument only addresses the effect of vigorous exercise on one’s risk of cardio-respiratory illnesses. Whether vigorous exercise also prevents other diseases is irrelevant.
D
fails to consider the possibility that those who engage in vigorous physical exercise are more likely than others to perceive themselves as healthy
The columnist is discussing the actual effect of vigorous exercise on one’s risk of cardio-respiratory illness. Whether people who exercise vigorously perceive themselves to be healthy has nothing to do with their actual health.
E
fails to show that a certain conclusion of the recent report is better justified than an opposing conclusion reached in older studies
The columnist assumes that the recent report is correct and the older studies are wrong, but she fails to provide any evidence for this. She doesn’t give any reason to believe that the conclusion of the recent report is better justified.
Summary
The stimulus can be diagrammed as follows:
Notable Valid Inferences
People shouldn’t undergo mediation if the conflict they seek to resolve is based on ideology.
A
People who do not undergo mediation to resolve their conflicts should be sure that their positions are correct.
Could be false. This answer wants you to believe that the only options for people with conflicts are mediation or litigation, but the stimulus doesn’t tell us that. Maybe there’s another conflict resolution method, or maybe some people don’t resolve their conflicts at all.
B
People whose conflicts are not based on ideology should attempt to resolve their conflicts by means of litigation.
Could be false. If your conflicts are not ideological, maybe you’re willing to compromise and you should mediate! Furthermore, we can’t make any inference connecting “ideology-based conflicts” with “should pursue litigation.” Maybe there are more conflict resolution methods.
C
People whose conflicts are based on ideology are not always sure that their positions are correct.
Could be false. Nothing in the stimulus allows us to link ideology-based conflicts with being sure that one’s position is correct. Maybe everyone with an ideology-based conflict is sure that their positions are correct and they should all pursue litigation!
D
People who are sure of the correctness of their positions are not people who should undergo mediation to resolve their conflicts.
Could be false. (D) wants you to confuse the necessary with the sufficient: we know that you should be sure you’re correct if you’re going to pursue litigation, but not that you should pursue litigation if you’re sure you’re correct. Maybe mediation is preferable to litigation.
E
People whose conflicts are based on ideology are not people who should undergo mediation to resolve their conflicts.
Must be true. As shown below, we can chain the conditional claims to see that “should pursue mediation” is a sufficient condition of “conflicts are not ideology-based.” By the contrapositive, “conflicts ideology-based” is a sufficient condition of “should not pursue mediation.”
Summary
If an artwork is great, it must express a deep emotion.
If an artwork expresses an emotion, that artwork’s creator must be capable of experiencing the emotion in question.
If an artwork expresses an emotion, that artwork’s creator must be capable of experiencing the emotion in question.
Very Strongly Supported Conclusions
If an artwork is great, its creator must be able to experience at least one emotion.
A
A computer can create an artwork that expresses sorrow or love only if it has actually experienced such an emotion.
Unsupported. We know that in order to create an artwork that expresses sorrow or love, a computer must be capable of experiencing that emotion. However, that doesn’t mean the computer needs to have actually experienced it.
B
The greatest art is produced by those who have experienced the deepest emotions.
Unsupported. Creators of great art must be able to experience deep emotion, but that doesn’t mean that the art’s level of greatness correlates with the depth of the creator’s emotions.
C
An artwork that expresses a deep emotion of its creator is a great artwork.
Unsupported. “Expresses deep emotion” is a necessary condition of “great artwork”, but it is not a sufficient condition. While every great artwork expresses deep emotion, that doesn’t mean that every artwork that expresses deep emotion is great.
D
As long as computers are constructed so as to be incapable of experiencing emotions they will not create great artworks.
Very strongly supported. As shown in the stimulus diagram, we can chain the conditional claims to see that “can experience emotion” is a necessary condition of “great artwork.” In other words, computers can only create great artwork if they’re able to experience emotion.
E
Only artworks that succeed in expressing deep emotions are the products of great artists.
Unsupported. The stimulus doesn’t rule out the possibility that great artists sometimes produce unemotional (and therefore not great) artworks!
Cookie Cutter Review
Disagree question where (E) is testing your understanding of negating conditional statements just like question 21.
Channen: Not everybody thinks that way. After all, money is the universal medium of exchange. So, if you have enough of it, you can exchange it for whatever other material goods you may need or want even if you are indifferent to what others think of you.
Speaker 1 Summary
Megan doesn’t make an argument, instead just stating a claim that once people’s basic needs are met, they only pursue additional wealth in order to increase their status or prestige.
Speaker 2 Summary
Channen argues that not everyone thinks about wealth in the way Megan describes. To show this, Channen points out that money is the universal medium of exchange. This means that even someone who doesn’t care about status or prestige might want more money in order to buy material goods. This acts as a hypothetical counter-example to Megan’s claim.
Objective
We need to find a point of disagreement. Megan and Channen disagree about the reasons people might have for pursuing wealth after their basic needs are met. Megan thinks the only reason is status and prestige, but Channen thinks there are other possibilities.
A
people ever pursue wealth beyond what is required for their basic needs
Both speakers agree that people can pursue wealth beyond what is required for their basic needs. Their disagreement is just about what would motivate someone to do so.
B
it is irrational to try to achieve high status or prestige in the eyes of one’s society
Like (C) and (D), neither speaker discusses rationality at all. The argument between Megan and Channen is about what people’s motivations are, not whether those motivations are rational.
C
the pursuit of monetary wealth is irrational only when it has no further purpose
Like (B) and (D), neither Megan nor Channen says anything about rationality or irrationality. What’s at question here is why people would seek wealth past a certain point, not whether the reasons for doing so are rational.
D
it is rational to maximize one’s ability to purchase whatever one wants only when the motive for doing so is something other than the desire for prestige
Like (B) and (C), rationality is never brought up by either speaker. The question of whether seeking additional wealth is rational is simply outside the scope of Megan and Channen’s discussion.
E
the motive for pursuing wealth beyond what one’s basic needs require is ever anything other than the desire for prestige or high status
Megan disagrees with this: her only claim is that this statement is not true. Channen, however, agrees and offers a hypothetical example to support this idea. This is the point of disagreement.