Summarize Argument
The author concludes that if more landlords install individual electricity meters on tenant dwellings (thereby giving individuals an incentive save energy), energy will be conserved. This is because tenants who don’t have to pay for their own electricity bills don’t have a financial incentive to conserve electricity.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that the financial incentive created by the indvidual electricity meters is powerful enough to cause people to actually change their behavior. The author also assumes that there aren’t other aspects of using individual electricity meters that would cause more energy use that could outweigh whatever savings are created by the individual’s own incentive to use less energy.
A
Tenants who do not have to pay their own electricity bills generally must compensate by paying more rent.
This has no clear impact on how much energy would be used. Tenants would still have an incentive to save on energy. Whether they get to pay less rent doesn’t influence how much energy they use.
B
Many initiatives have been implemented to educate people about how much money they can save through energy conservation.
This suggests people might be aware of how much they can save on energy. If anything, this strengthens the author’s argument by giving another reason to think tenants will start to save on energy use if tenants were responsible for their own electricity bills.
C
Landlords who pay for their tenants’ electricity have a strong incentive to make sure that the appliances they provide for their tenants are energy efficient.
This raises the possibility that by switching to individual meters, landlords won’t be as likely to ensure their appliances are energy-efficient. Thus, even if tenants use the appliances less often, the appliances themselves might use more energy.
D
Some tenant dwellings can only support individual electricity meters if the dwellings are rewired, which would be prohibitively expensive.
This suggests that landlords won’t be able to switch to individual meters in some buildings. The author never said this was possible everywhere. The conclusion is simply about what would result if landlords were able to make this switch.
E
Some people conserve energy for reasons that are not related to cost savings.
This suggests some people might save energy for other reasons. But this doesn’t mean that cost can’t also be a motivating factor for those people. The individual meter can still incentivize them to save on energy. And, the author never assumed every tenant will conserve energy.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that darker coffee roasts irritate the stomach less than lighter roasts. This is because darker roasts contain more NMP, which suppresses production of irritating stomach acid.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that darker roasts don’t stimulate greater production of irritating stomach acid (i.e. through more caffeine) than lighter roasts. Alternately, the author assumes that the NMP in darker roasts outweighs this additional acid production, if such additional acid production in fact occurs.
A
Does extending the roasting time of coffee beans increase the amount of caffeine present in the brewed coffee?
If the answer is “yes,” then the NMP in darker roasts might not be enough to counteract the additional caffeine and subsequent stomach acid production. If the answer is “no,” then darker roasts likely would be less irritating—more NMP means less irritating stomach acid.
B
Does a reduction in acid production in the stomach have an adverse effect on stomach function?
We’re evaluating whether darker roasts really do decrease acid production in the stomach. This concedes that point in advance, which means it has little to no bearing on the author’s argument.
C
Would coffee drinkers who drink caffeinated coffee increase their coffee consumption if the coffee they drank contained less caffeine?
Irrelevant. We don’t know if lighter or darker roasts have more caffeine.
D
Do some coffee drinkers who switch from lighter to darker roasts of coffee increase their daily coffee consumption?
Irrelevant. We have no idea what the effects of switching from lighter roast to darker roast coffee would be in regards to stomach irritation, which is what the author’s argument is about.
E
Do lighter roasts of coffee have any important health benefits that darker roasts of coffee lack?
We don’t care about other health benefits. The author’s argument is about stomach irritation, so we need to evaluate if darker roasts really would cause less stomach irritation than lighter roasts for the reason the author cites.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that Juan must have entered the logo-generation contest. The author supports this conclusion with the following:
One of the rules stated that everyone who entered the contest would receive a T-shirt with the company’s logo.
Juan has a T-shirt with the company’s logo.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author confuses a sufficient condition with a necessary condition. Entrance into the contest is sufficient to get the T-shirt. But that doesn’t mean it’s necessary. Maybe some people could have gotten the T-shirt without entering the contest.
A
infers a causal relationship when the evidence only supports a correlation
The argument doesn’t conclude or assume a causal relationship. The argument’s based on application of a conditional rule.
B
takes a condition that is sufficient for a particular outcome as one that is necessary for that outcome
The contest rules tell us that entrance into the contest is sufficient for the outcome of getting a T-shirt with the logo. But that doesn’t imply entrance into the contest is necessary for the T-shirt. So the fact Juan has the T-shirt doesn’t prove that he entered the contest.
C
infers that every member of a group has a feature in common on the grounds that the group as a whole has that feature
The argument doesn’t commit a whole-to-part fallacy. The evidence concerns a rule of the contest and Juan. The conclusion is based on an attempt to apply that rule to Juan. The author doesn’t conclude or assume anything about every member of a group.
D
has a premise that presupposes the truth of the conclusion
(D) describes circular reasoning. The author’s conclusion — that Juan entered the contest — is not restated in the premises.
E
constructs a generalization on the basis of a single instance
The argument doesn’t generalize based on a single instance. The argument tries to apply a conditional rule to Juan. The argument doesn’t conclude or assume anything about a broader group.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that the 1/20,000 figure is less reliable than the 1 in 2 million figure concerning the chance a commercial flight will stray off course when landing. This is based on the fact that the 1/20,000 figure is based on a partial review of air traffic ccontrol tapes, while the 1 in 2 mill. figure is based on a study of flight reports of pilots for all commercial flights.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author doesn’t provide any compelling reason to think a partial review of air traffic control tapes is any less reliable than a review of flight reports for all flights. The tapes might contain more accurate information than the flight reports, even if the tapes don’t involve a review of all flights.
A
The argument presumes, without providing justification, that building runways closer together will encourage pilots to be more cautious while landing.
The argument concerns which statistic is more reliable. The impact of building runways closer together on pilots’ level of caution doesn’t bear on which statistic is more reliable.
B
The argument overlooks the fact that those who make mistakes are often unreliable sources of information about those mistakes.
The flight reports are “required of pilots”; this indicates the pilots are the sources of the reports. (B) points out that this information can be unreliable, because pilots who stray off course — which is a mistake — might not report that mistake.
C
The argument questions the integrity of those who are opposed to allowing runways to be built closer together.
The argument doesn’t question the integrity of any individuals. It relies on premises concerning the basis of the two statistics. Neither of these statistics comes from those who are against closer runways.
D
The argument presumes, without providing justification, that the air traffic control tapes studied do not provide accurate information concerning specific flights.
The author doesn’t assert that the tapes cannot provide accurate information. The author’s complaint is that the review of those tapes is only “partial.” So the author is open to the possibility that information in the tapes is accurate; it may be accurate, but incomplete.
E
The argument infers from a lack of conclusive evidence supporting the higher number’s accuracy that it must be inaccurate.
The author doesn’t conclude that the 1/20,000 figure is inaccurate, only that it’s less reliable. Also, the basis of the conclusion is not a lack of conclusive evidence for the 1/20,000 figure. The basis is a comparison of the sources of the two figures.