Summarize Argument
The linguist looks to certain studies purporting to show that bilingual children tend to have a smaller vocabulary and concludes that these studies are deeply flawed. As evidence, the linguist states that vocabulary tests were only given in one language. Dual-language tests show children often expressed a given concept with a word from only one of their two languages.
Describe Method of Reasoning
The linguist shows that the studies are deeply flawed by pointing out a significant error in their methodology. If the children were given tests in only one language, then the tests are flawed because dual-language tests show children often express concepts with words from only one of their two languages.
A
offering evidence for the advantages of bilingualism over monolingualism
The linguist does not compare the advantages and disadvantages between bilingualism and monolingualism. The linguist’s argument does not address children who are monolingual.
B
pointing out an inconsistency in the view that bilingualism overstresses a child’s linguistic capabilities
The linguist does not describe a contradiction with this viewpoint. Instead, the linguist provides additional information relevant to evaluating the integrity of the studies that support this viewpoint.
C
offering evidence that undermines the use of any vocabulary test to provide information about a child’s conceptual map
The linguist only disfavors a specific kind of vocabulary test. We cannot assume that the linguist would disfavor any vocabulary test. In fact, the linguist seems to view dual-language tests somewhat favorably.
D
providing a different explanation for the apparent advantages of bilingualism from the explanation suggested by the results of certain studies
The linguist does not address any advantages of bilingualism. The linguist’s argument seeks to counter the viewpoint of bilingual children having a disadvantage, but this is not the same as describing the advantages of bilingualism.
E
pointing out a methodological error in the technique used to obtain the purported evidence of a problem with bilingualism
the methodological error in technique is administering a vocabulary test in only one language. The evidence of the problem with bilingualism is the evidence that bilingual children have a smaller vocabulary and thus reduced conceptual map.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author claims that different species commonly change their environment in ways that aid their survival, contrary to the assumption that only very intelligent species do so. To support this claim, the author gives an example of plankton, whose gas emissions lead to clouds forming over the ocean, which cools the Earth and benefits the plankton.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s broad statement that the characteristic of species altering their environment to assist their own survival “is actually quite common.”
A
The Earth would be far warmer than it is now if certain species of plankton became extinct.
This may be implied by the statements in the argument, but it is not the main conclusion because plankton are only used as an example to support the more general claim that many species beneficially alter their environments.
B
By altering their environment in ways that improve their chances of survival, certain species of plankton benefit the Earth as a whole.
The author never makes a claim that the plankton’s effects on the environment benefit the Earth as a whole. This is easy to assume based on knowledge that global warming is harmful, but it is not something the author says.
C
Improving their own chances of survival by altering the environment is not limited to the most highly evolved species.
This accurately captures the author’s main conclusion. The rest of the argument, i.e. the plankton example, provides support for the author’s claim that beneficial environment alteration is common and not restricted to highly-evolved species.
D
The extent of the cloud cover over the oceans is largely determined by the quantity of plankton in those oceans.
This is not something the author claims. Based on the argument, plankton might be sufficient to emit particles that cause cloud cover, but we don’t know if they’re necessary or if there may be other sources of these particles.
E
Species such as plankton alter the environment in ways that are less detrimental to the well-being of other species than are the alterations to the environment made by more highly evolved species.
The author never says anything about how other species are affected by the changes plankton make. The focus is on one species at a time, not the wider effects.
Summary
Caffeine can be as physically addictive as other psychoactive substances.
Some people become unusually depressed, drowsy, or irritable if they don’t have the level of caffeine they’re used to.
As many people consume caffeine as consume any of the other addictive psychoactive substances. So, for example, if 100 people eat psychoactive substance X, then at least 100 people consume caffeine.
Some people become unusually depressed, drowsy, or irritable if they don’t have the level of caffeine they’re used to.
As many people consume caffeine as consume any of the other addictive psychoactive substances. So, for example, if 100 people eat psychoactive substance X, then at least 100 people consume caffeine.
Notable Valid Inferences
There’s no clear inference that I’d have in mind. I’d just use process of elimination for the answer choices.
A
There is no psychoactive substance to which more people are physically addicted than are addicted to caffeine.
Could be false. We know that as many people CONSUME caffeine as consume other psych subs. That doesn’t mean the caffeine-consumers are addicted to it. Also, caffeine CAN BE as physically addictive as psych. substances. That doesn’t tell us how many people actually are addicted.
B
A physical addiction to a particular psychoactive substance will typically give rise to diverse psychological symptoms.
Could be false. We know “some” people have certain symptoms if they don’t have enough caffeine. That doesn’t mean these symptoms are “typical” results of addiction. “Typical” means most of the time.
C
Not all substances to which people can become physically addicted are psychoactive.
Could be false. The stimulus only tells us about psychoactive substances. We have no idea whether there are substances that people can be addicted to that are NOT psychoactive.
D
If one is physically addicted to a psychoactive substance, one will become unusually depressed when one is no longer ingesting that substance.
Could be false. We know “some” people become depressed from not getting enough caffeine. That doesn’t mean if you’re addicted to a substance, you “will” become unusually depressed if you don’t get the substance. We don’t know that result is guaranteed.
E
If alcohol is a physically addictive psychoactive substance, there are not more people who consume alcohol than consume caffeine.
Must be true. Based on the last sentence. As many consume caffeine as consume any other addictive psych subs. So if alchohol is addictive psych subs., as many people consume caffeine as consume alcohol.
Summarize Argument
The biologist concludes that humans would be equally satisfied with six fingers if they’d descended from a six-fingered fish. This is because five fingers are no more or less useful than six fingers.
Notable Assumptions
In order for humans to be equally satisfied by six fingers, biologist assumes that humans are equally satisfied by equally useful things. The biologist shifts from usefulness to satisfaction without justification.
A
Everyone is equally content with our present configuration of fingers.
We don’t need everyone in the world to be content with our present configuration. Besides, the biologist never claims we actually are content with having five fingers. She claims we would be equally content with six fingers, but we don’t know how content that is.
B
Humans are never equally content with two things of unequal usefulness.
We’re not talking about things of unequal usefulness. We’re interested in things that are equally useful.
C
Humans are always equally content with two things of equal usefulness.
Humans are equally content with two equally useful things—in this case, hands with five or six fingers. This clarifies the relationship between contentment and usefulness.
D
The perceived usefulness of our configuration of fingers is an illusory result of our prejudices.
Five fingers seem to be pretty useful. We need to strengthen the claim that humans would be as content with six fingers.
E
At least one species of fish had six phalanges in its fins.
Irrelevant. Humans descended from a fish with five phalanges.