Aerobics instructor: Compared to many forms of exercise, kickboxing aerobics is highly risky. Overextending when kicking often leads to hip, knee, or lower-back injuries. Such overextension is very likely to occur when beginners try to match the high kicks of more skilled practitioners.

Summary

Compared to some other forms of exercise, kickboxing aerobics is highly risky. Overextending while kicking can cause hip, knee, or lower-back injuries. Overextension usually happens when beginners try to match the high kicks of skilled kickboxers.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

To reduce a person’s risk of injuries caused by overextension, that person should avoid overextending while kicking.

A
Skilled practitioners of kickboxing aerobics are unlikely to experience injuries from overextending while kicking.

This answer is unsupported. The aerobics instructor does not give us any information about the likelihood of skilled practitioners experiencing injuries.

B
To reduce the risk of injuries, beginners at kickboxing aerobics should avoid trying to match the high kicks of more skilled practitioners.

This answer is strongly supported. Since we know overextension can cause injury, then students should avoid overextending to reduce their risk of injury. An absent or reduced cause can lead to an absent or reduced effect.

C
Beginners at kickboxing aerobics will not experience injuries if they avoid trying to match the high kicks of more skilled practitioners.

This answer is unsupported. We don’t know if overextending while kicking is the only cause of injury to beginners. It is possible that beginners could experience injury some other way.

D
Kickboxing aerobics is more risky than forms of aerobic exercise that do not involve high kicks.

This answer is unsupported. We know that kickboxing aerobics is more risky than many forms of exercise, but we don’t know whether this comparison is to other forms that do not involve high kicks.

E
Most beginners at kickboxing aerobics experience injuries from trying to match the high kicks of more skilled practitioners.

This answer is unsupported. We do not know whether most beginners will for a fact overextend while kicking.


17 comments

A large company has been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices. The penalty imposed on the company will probably have little if any effect on its behavior. Still, the trial was worthwhile, since it provided useful information about the company’s practices. After all, this information has emboldened the company’s direct competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior toward customers and competitors.

Summarize Argument
The trial of a large company was valuable despite the likely ineffectiveness of the penalty. The trial was valuable because it revealed information about the company’s practices. This new information empowered the company’s competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to moderate its unfair behavior.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the contention that the trial was worthwhile because it revealed information about the company, which led to positive outcomes.

A
Even if the company had not been convicted of engaging in monopolistic practices, the trial probably would have had some effect on the company’s behavior.
This is not an argument made in the stimulus. The author does not speculate on what would have happened had the company not been convicted. While the author might agree with this claim, it is not part of the argument presented and therefore cannot be the main conclusion.
B
The light shed on the company’s practices by the trial has emboldened its competitors, alerted potential rivals, and forced the company to restrain its unfair behavior.
This premise supports the sub-conclusion that the trial “provided useful information.” It specifies that the trial exposed the company’s practices and explains the value of this revelation: it empowered competitors, alerted rivals, and forced the company to change its behavior.
C
The penalty imposed on the company will likely have little or no effect on its behavior.
This is part of the stimulus’s context. This sentence explains why some may consider the trial a waste of time—because its penalty is unlikely to affect the company’s behavior—and sets the stage for the author to explain why the trial was valuable despite the ineffective penalty.
D
The company’s trial on charges of engaging in monopolistic practices was worthwhile.
This answer restates the main conclusion (“the trial was worthwhile”) with context that describes the trial (“the company’s trial on charges of engaging in monopolistic practices”). The subsequent claims support this conclusion by explaining why the trial was valuable.
E
The penalty imposed on the company in the trial should have been larger.
This is not an argument made in the stimulus. The author argues that the penalty was inadequate to change the company’s behavior but does not claim the penalty should have been larger. While the author might agree, it is not part of the argument and cannot be the main conclusion.

3 comments

This is a video for Passage A and Questions.


26 comments