Summarize Argument
A society that wants the benefits of pure science should use public funds to support research. The research needs lots of funds and does not bring short-term profits. Private corporations will not fund projects without short term profits. Therefore, public funds should be used instead.
Identify Argument Part
This is an alternative course of action that is ruled out in favor of the conclusion. Private corporate funding won’t work, so we should use public funding instead.
A
It expresses the conclusion of the argument.
This is not supported by any other part of the argument, so it cannot be the conclusion.
B
It explains what is meant by the expression “pure research” in the context of the argument.
This claim does not tell us anything about pure research. The actual definition of what is meant is contained between the em dashes.
C
It distracts attention from the point at issue by introducing a different but related goal.
This does not describe a goal - it is telling us what corporations will not do. Additionally, it supports the point at issue by ruling out an alternative solution.
D
It supports the conclusion by ruling out an alternative way of achieving the benefits mentioned.
This is descriptively accurate. One of the reasons that we should use public funds is because another option, corporate funds, is not accessible.
E
It illustrates a case where unfortunate consequences result from a failure to accept the recommendation offered.
This is not a case, it is just a rule that the behavior of private corporations follows.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why are patients at large, urban hospitals less likely to recover than patients at small, rural hospitals?
Objective
The correct answer must offer an unsatisfactory hypothesis, one that fails to explain the different recovery rates. Every wrong answer, meanwhile, will give a reason that patients at small, rural hospitals recover at higher rates than those at large, urban hospitals.
A
Because there are fewer patients to feed, nutritionists at small hospitals are better able to tailor meals to the dietary needs of each patient.
This would explain the different recovery rates. Because patients at small hospitals are more likely to get personal dietary attention, they are more likely to recover.
B
The less friendly, more impersonal atmosphere of large hospitals can be a source of stress for patients at those hospitals.
This would explain the different recovery rates. Because patients at large hospitals are subject to stress from the impersonal atmosphere, they are less likely to recover.
C
Although large hospitals tend to draw doctors trained at the more prestigious schools, no correlation has been found between the prestige of a doctor’s school and patients’ recovery rate.
This rules out an explanation for the opposite discrepancy, but does not explain the discrepancy at hand. It implies that doctors at both types of hospitals are equally likely to help their patients recover, leaving the difference in recovery rates unexplained.
D
Because space is relatively scarce in large hospitals, doctors are encouraged to minimize the length of time that patients are held for observation following a medical procedure.
This would explain the different recovery rates. Because patients at large hospitals tend to be observed for less time, they are less likely to recover.
E
Doctors at large hospitals tend to have a greater number of patients and consequently less time to explain to staff and to patients how medications are to be administered.
This would explain the different recovery rates. Because patients and staff at large hospitals are more likely to misunderstand how to administer medication, they are less likely to benefit from that medication and thus the patients are less likely to recover.
Summarize Argument
It is fair for record labels to take a large portion of the profits from bands that signed with them because the band does not assume nearly as much risk as the label. When a label signs a band, they pay for a variety of highly expensive things and take on a high financial risk.
Identify Argument Part
This is an intermediate conclusion supported by the first sentence, which then supports the main conclusion that it is fair for labels to take large portions of the profits from bands they have signed.
A
It is the only conclusion that the argument attempts to establish.
This is not the only conclusion of the argument. It is an intermediate conclusion that supports the main conclusion that it is fair for labels to take a large cut of the profits from signed bands.
B
It is one of two unrelated conclusions, each of which the same premises are used to support.
The two conclusions are related and are supported differently. This conclusion is supported by the first sentence. The main conclusion is then supported by this sub-conclusion.
C
It is a general principle from which the argument’s conclusion follows as a specific instance.
This is not a general principle. It is a sub-conclusion that is supported by the fact that labels take on a considerable amount of risk when signing a band.
D
It describes a phenomenon for which the rest of the argument offers an explanation.
This is not a phenomenon that the rest of the argument seeks to explain. It is part of the reasoning that leads to author uses to justify their conclusion.
E
Premises are used to support it, and it is used to support the main conclusion.
The author supports the idea that a band signed with a major label does not need to assume as much risk. This sub-conclusion is then used to support the main conclusion that it is fair for the label to take a large portion of the profits.
Summary
Traditional statistical methods predicted that some humans would live over 130 years.
EVT methods estimated the human lifespan limit to be between 113 and 124 years.
No human has lived beyond the EVT predicted limit.
EVT methods estimated the human lifespan limit to be between 113 and 124 years.
No human has lived beyond the EVT predicted limit.
Very Strongly Supported Conclusions
EVT estimates are more in line with the data on the longest living humans than are traditional statistical methods.
A
EVT is, in general, a more reliable method for projecting future trends based on past observations than are traditional statistical methods.
Unsupported. Like (E), the stimulus is only addressing each method’s analysis of data on human longevity. We can’t infer that EVT is a more reliable method in general for projecting any future trends.
B
EVT fits the data about the highest observed human life spans more closely than do traditional statistical methods.
Very strongly supported. EVT predicted a life span limit of 113-124 years, while traditional methods predicted a limit of over 130 years. Since the highest observed human life span is shorter than the EVT predicted limit, EVT fits the data more closely.
C
According to the findings derived through the use of EVT, it is physically impossible for any human being to live longer than 124 years.
Unsupported. Like (D), just because no one has lived longer than 124 years so far doesn’t mean that no one ever will. The EVT findings are just describing a statistically probable limit based on data; they aren’t implying that it’s physically impossible to live longer.
D
Given the results generated by EVT, there is no point in conducting research aimed at greatly extending the upper limit on human life spans.
Unsupported. Like (C), just because no one has lived longer than 124 years so far doesn’t mean that no one ever will or that researching longer lifespans is pointless.
E
Traditional statistical methods of empirical data analysis should eventually be replaced by some version of EVT.
Unsupported. Like (A), the stimulus is only addressing each method’s analysis of data on human longevity. We don’t have enough information about either method’s overall accuracy to infer that EVT should entirely replace traditional methods.