Summarize Argument
The author concludes that, when humans begin to tap into the tremendous source of creativity and innovation, that many problems that seem insurmountable today will be within our ability to solve. To support this, the author notes that over 90% of the brain remains unused (a sub-conclusion that is supported by the observation that many people with significant brain damage experience no noticeable negative effects).
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that the large portion of the brain that currently serves no purpose could be a source of creativity and innovation. From the information given, we have no reason to believe that these parts of the brain are a potential source of creativity and innovation––they could, for example, be purely structural with no potential to impact one’s creativity.
A
The argument presumes, without providing justification, that the effects of brain damage are always easily detectable.
The argument does not make this assumption––there is no indication that brain damage is ever (or always) “easily” detectable.
B
The argument presumes, without providing justification, that the only reason that any problem remains unsolved is a lack of creativity and innovation.
A lack of creativity and innovation is presumed to be a reason that some problems haven’t been solved, but the argument does not presume that a lack of creativity and innovation is the only reason for any unsolved problem.
C
The argument infers that certain parts of the brain do nothing merely on the basis of the assertion that we do not know what they do.
The argument does not make this inference merely based on the fact that we don’t know what these parts of the brain do. Instead, the inference is based on the observation that significant brain damage does not have discernible adverse effects in many people.
D
The argument infers that problems will be solved merely on the basis of the claim that they will be within our ability to solve.
The argument does not make this inference. The argument does not claim that these problems will be solved; the argument only says that the problems will be in our ability to solve.
E
The argument presumes, without providing justification, that the currently unused parts of the brain are a potential source of tremendous creativity and innovation.
The author says that 90% of the human brain is unused, then in the conclusion jumps to the claim about “this tremendous source of creativity and innovation.” We have no reason to believe that the unused parts of the brain are a potential source of creativity and innovation.
Summarize Argument
You can't fulfill the obligation to express gratitude anonymously. Human psychology is still primarily influenced by personal interaction, so to positively reinforce generous behavior, the person being thanked needs to know who is expressing the thanks.
Identify Argument Part
The stimulus text refers to the main conclusion of the argument: the obligation to express gratitude can’t be fulfilled anonymously because a person’s generous behavior will only be positively reinforced if the person knows who is expressing the thanks.
A
It is an illustration of a premise that is used to support the argument’s conclusion.
The claim is the overall conclusion. It does not support any other statement in the stimulus, so it cannot be an illustration of a premise in the argument.
B
It is used to counter a consideration that might be taken to undermine the argument’s conclusion.
The claim is the overall conclusion. This answer describes a premise, which would support the conclusion by anticipating and refuting an attack on it. Since the stimulus text is the conclusion, it cannot be a premise of the argument.
C
It is used to support indirectly a claim that the argument in turn uses to support directly the conclusion.
The stimulus text is the overall conclusion. It does not support any other statement in the stimulus, so it cannot be either direct or indirect support for another claim.
D
It is used to identify the social benefit with which the argument is concerned.
The stimulus text is the overall conclusion. The argument focuses on reinforcing generous behavior, which benefits society. However, this benefit is mentioned in a premise as a reason why the obligation to express gratitude cannot be fulfilled anonymously.
E
It is the conclusion that the argument is intended to support.
This describes the role of the first sentence in the overall argument. The psychologist begins with her conclusion and spends the rest of the stimulus explaining how she reached that conclusion.
Curator: Our museum displays only twentieth-century works, which are either on loan from private collectors or in the museum’s permanent collection. Prints of all of the latter works are available in the museum store. The museum store also sells prints of some works that are not part of the museum’s permanent collection, such as Hopper’s Nighthawks.
Summary
If it’s on display, it’s a 20th century work.
If it’s a 20th century work on display, it’s on loan OR in the permanent collection.
If it’s in the permanent collection, prints of it are available in the store.
Some works that aren’t part of the permanent collection are in the store, such as Nighthawks.
Notable Valid Inferences
No particular inference stands out, aside from recognizing the connections between conditionals. If something’s on display, then it must be on loan OR permanent. If it’s permanent, prints of it are available in the store.
A
Every print in the museum store is of a work that is either on loan to the museum from a private collector or part of the museum’s permanent collection.
Could be false. We don’t know about everything available in the store. We know that anything in permanent collection is available in the store. That doesn’t tell us that everything available in the store is on loan or in the permanent collection.
B
Every print that is sold in the museum store is a copy of a twentieth-century work.
Could be false. We don’t know about everything available in the store. There could be many things in the store that are not on display.
C
There are prints in the museum store of every work that is displayed in the museum and not on loan from a private collector.
Must be true. If it’s on display, but not on loan, it must be in permanent. And if it’s in permanent, there are prints available of it in the store.
D
Hopper’s Nighthawks is both a twentieth-century work and a work on loan to the museum from a private collector.
Could be false. We know Nighthawks is not part of the permanent collection. That doesn’t tell us anything else about Nighthawks. It might be on loan, or it might not. It might be 20th century, or it might not.
E
Hopper’s Nighthawks is not displayed in the museum.
Could be false. We know Nighthawks is not part of the permanent collection. That doesn’t tell us whether it is on display. It might be, or it might not.
Summarize Argument
The teacher believes funding for children’s athletic programs should not be eliminated. Although critics point out that participating in competitive athletics may lead to feelings of inferiority, research shows that adults with these feelings tend to become more successful than those without them. Additionally, the teacher notes that competitive athletics can increase a child’s strength and coordination, further supporting the argument.
Identify Argument Part
It is one of two premises that support the conclusion that funding for children’s competitive athletic programs should not be eliminated.
A
It is mentioned as one possible reason for adopting a policy for which the teacher suggests an additional reason.
The teacher mentions the benefit of increased strength and coordination to support the conclusion and also suggests another reason (the development of feelings of inferiority leading to future success) to continue funding for athletic programs.
B
It is a claim that the teacher attempts to refute with counterarguments.
The teacher does not attempt to refute this. The teacher believes this statement and uses it to support their main conclusion.
C
It is a hypothesis for which the teacher offers additional evidence.
The teacher does not provide additional evidence for this claim. This claim is used as evidence to support the teacher’s main conclusion
D
It is cited as an insufficient reason for eliminating funding for children’s athletic programs.
This is not a reason to *eliminate* funding. This is utilized as a reason to *not eliminate* funding.
E
It is cited as an objection that has been raised to the position that the teacher is supporting.
This is not an objection to the teacher’s argument. The teacher uses it as support for their argument
A
The argument takes for granted that truly generous people are the most virtuous.
Neither the premise nor the conclusion concern who is the “most” virtuous. Whether generous people are more or less virtuous than others doesn’t affect the reasoning.
B
The argument attacks the character of those whose values are different from those of the columnist.
There’s no attack on the character of anyone. The argument concerns the trait of generosity, but the author doesn’t comment on whether any person or group has a particular character trait.
C
The argument takes for granted that a character trait is present only when manifested.
The argument assumes that a character trait (generosity) is present only when manifested (only if people are donating). This overlooks the possibility that a character trait can be permanent even if people do not show that trait through actions.
D
The argument generalizes from too small a sample of cases.
The premise concerns “most donors.” The author doesn’t conclude anything about all donors, or conclude anything about actions besides donation. So there’s no inappropriate generalization. We also don’t know anything about the # of donors, so can’t say any sample is “too small.”
E
The argument takes for granted that most people donate out of generosity.
The author notes that donating items “may” be a sign of generosity. This doesn’t imply the author believes most people who donate items are doing so because of generosity.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Despite literally just being born, newborn infants are able to recognize faces versus other face-shaped images.
Objective
The right answer will be a hypothesis that explains how newborn infants posses the ability to recognize faces despite having virtually no experience seeing faces. This could be that they have an inherent ability to do so, or that they particularly remember the faces they saw around them when they were born.
A
Certain abilities of facial pattern recognition are innate in humans, rather than learned.
Infants have the innate ability to recognize faces, hence why they can recognize faces even as newborns.
B
The longer an infant stares at an object, the more interesting the infant finds that object.
Why do infants stare at images of faces more than other images? This answer choice doesn’t explain why they’re drawn to faces in the first place.
C
Infants learn to associate human faces with the necessities of comfort and nourishment.
Newborn infants haven’t learned anything at all. They’re newborns. This doesn’t make sense.
D
The less an infant stares at an object, the weaker the preference the infant has for that object.
Like (B), we need to know why infants are staring at faces more than other images. This answer doesn’t explain that.
E
Infants learn to associate the sound of human voices with the images of human faces.
Here, we have the same problem as in (C). Newborns haven’t learned anything.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author concludes that the average citizen of this town is more likely than in the past to become a victim of violent crime. (This is a restatement of the first sentence, which you could also view as the conlcusion). This conclusion is based on the fact that compared to last year, local law enforcement agencies have responded to more calls involving violent crimes.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that the increased calls involving violent crimes is due to an actual increase in violent crime. (It could be due to something else, such as a greater tendency among the population to call the police when they see violent crime.) The author also assumes that any increase in the number of violent crimes actually increased the rate of crime. It’s possible the population has just grown disproportionately, such that the rate of crime has actually gone down.
A
The town’s overall crime rate appears to have risen slightly this year compared to the same period last year.
The argument is about violent crimes, not just crimes generally, so there’s no clear impact. If anything, this might strengthen the argument by showing that the overall crime rate has increased, which might include violent crime, too.
B
In general, persons under the age of 65 are less likely to be victims of violent crimes than persons over the age of 65.
But the average person can still be more likely to be a victim this year, even if there are different likelihoods between different age groups.
C
As a result of the town’s community outreach programs, more people than ever are willing to report violent crimes to the proper authorities.
This provides an alternate explanation for the increased calls involving violent crimes. These calls might not reflect an increase in actual crimes, but just an increase in the willingness to call about violent crimes.
D
In response to worries about violent crime, the town has recently opened a community center providing supervised activities for teenagers.
The town’s response doesn’t reveal anything about the crime rate. Maybe the town thinks there’s been an increase in violent crime? That doesn’t suggest whether there has or hasn’t been an increase in violent crime.
E
Community officials have shown that a relatively small number of repeat offenders commit the majority of violent crimes in the town.
A small number of people committing most of the crimes can still lead to a higher violent crime rate compared to last year.