Note: This question is a veiled PSA question. How can we know this? Consider the question stem. It says that the argument's reasoning conforms to some principle. Stated another way, it means that some principle hiding in the answers is sustaining the reasoning. What would happen if you brought this principle (hiding in the answer) out into the light, explicitly? You would get a very strong premise. How strong? It turns out that in this case, so strong that it almost makes for a valid argument.
Correction at 3:16
I said, "How do we know that's true? Because of egg cartons. That's the type of food container made from recycled styrofoam that contacts the food it contains which is the whole egg."
That's wrong. The egg cartons do not contact the food contained inside. It was specified in the stimulus that the "actual food" is prevented from contacting the styrofoam because it is separated by the egg shells. (E) instead is supported because of the last line of the stimulus "other food containers". That's referencing things like styrofoam salad bowls and styrofoam plates from food carts, neither of which is specifically mentioned.
A
presents as its sole premise a claim that one would accept as true only if one already accepted the truth of the conclusion
(A) describes circular reasoning. But the argument does not rely on a premise that restates its conclusion. The premise involves survey results. The conclusion is that “we treat our employees fairly.”
B
relies on evidence that cannot be verified
The evidence consists of survey results. There’s no reason to think that the results of the survey cannot be verified. Just count up the responses. In any case, there’s nothing flawed with relying on evidence that can’t be verified.
C
equivocates on the word “fairly”
There’s no reason to think “fairly” is used in two different ways. Each use of “fairly” has the same definition: treated in a way that is right or just.
D
bases a generalization on a sample that may not be representative
The argument’s conclusion is a generalization concerning how “employees” are treated. But the evidence is based on a sample of retirees — their opinion might not be representative of employees’ opinion.
E
presumes, without providing justification, that older methods of managing employees are superior to newer ones
The author never compares older methods to news ones. The author might believe that the same managing methods are used, and that those methods treat employees both new and past fairly.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that national reading campaigns encouraging people to read more fiction have been largely unsuccessful. This is because bookstore revenue from fiction sales has decreased over the last five years.
Notable Assumptions
Based solely on a correlation between the reading campaigns and bookstore fiction sales, the author concludes that the reading campaigns have failed to achieve their purpose. He therefore assumes that the reading campaigns haven’t mitigated what would’ve otherwise been an even steeper decline in fiction sales. The author also assumes that bookstore sales signal a decline in fiction sales. Thus, he believes that bookstore fiction sales haven’t been siphoned off by some other method (e.g. online) sales.
A
Mail order book clubs have enjoyed substantial growth in fiction sales throughout the last five years.
While bookstore fiction sales have decreased, mail order fiction sales have substantially increased. Thus, the national reading campaign may well have encouraged people to read more fiction. At the very least, the author can’t draw the conclusion that the campaign has failed.
B
During the last five years the most profitable items in bookstores have been newspapers and periodicals rather than novels.
Revenue from fiction sales at bookstores has decreased, regardless of how newspaper sales have changed. This doesn’t offset that fact in any way that would weaken the author’s argument.
C
Fierce competition has forced booksellers to make drastic markdowns on the cover price of best-selling biographies.
Biographies aren’t fiction. We don’t care.
D
Due to the poor economic conditions that have prevailed during the last five years, most libraries report substantial increases in the number of patrons seeking books on changing careers and starting new businesses.
These sorts of books aren’t fiction. We’re not interested.
E
The National Booksellers Association statistics do not include profits from selling novels by mail to overseas customers.
We care about the effects of the national reading campaign. Overseas customers don’t matter.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why do people who consume a lot of honey tend to have fewer cavities than others even though honey is high in sugar, which is one of the leading causes of tooth decay?
Objective
The correct answer will help explain why people who eat a lot of honey tend to have fewer cavities than others even though honey is high in sugar. The correct answer will discuss outside factors that are typically true for people who eat a lot of honey that lead to them having fewer cavities or reasons that eating honey actually leads to fewer cavities even though it’s high in sugar.
A
People who eat a lot of honey tend to consume very little sugar from other sources.
It doesn’t matter how much sugar people who eat a lot of honey tend to consume from other sources. We know they consume a lot of sugar because of the amount of honey they eat.
B
Many people who consume a lot of honey consume much of it dissolved in drinks.
The way people who consume a lot of honey choose to consume that honey is irrelevant. Regardless of their consumption method, they’re ingesting a lot of sugar, so we want to know why they tend to have fewer cavities than others.
C
People’s dental hygiene habits vary greatly.
This is a nonfactor. We know nothing about the typical dental hygiene habits of people who eat a lot of honey or those who don’t, so (C) is irrelevant.
D
Refined sugars have been linked to more health problems than have unrefined sugars.
We’re not concerned with miscellaneous health problems. We want to know why those who consume large amounts of honey tend to have fewer cavities than others even though honey contains high levels of sugar.
E
Honey contains bacteria that inhibit the growth of the bacteria that cause tooth decay.
(E) provides a reason that eating honey can prevent cavities even though honey is high in sugar. The bacteria in honey that inhibit the growth of tooth-decaying bacteria could do more to prevent cavities than the sugar in honey contributes to cavities.
A
fails to consider the possibility that Thibodeaux has arrived late for two or more monthly general meetings
We know that Thibodeaux didn’t miss any monthly meetings. Lateness to a monthly meeting is irrelevant, since we’re not told that this leads to a suspension. (Lateness to quarterly is sufficient for suspension, but we don’t know about lateness to monthly.)
B
presumes, without providing justification, that if certain events each produce a particular result, then no other event is sufficient to produce that result
The author assumes that nothing besides lateness to quarterly or missing 2 monthly could be sufficient for suspension. This overlooks the possibility that other things could also be sufficient for suspension. That’s why Thib. doesn’t have to have been late to a quarterly meeting.
C
takes for granted that an assumption required to establish the argument’s conclusion is sufficient to establish that conclusion
The assumption required to establish the conclusion is the idea that there’s no other way to be suspended besides the two conditions mentioned. That assumption actually would be sufficient to establish the conclusion, so (C) doesn’t describe a flaw in this argument.
D
fails to specify at what point someone arriving at a club meeting is officially deemed late
The exact timing involved in being “late” is irrelevant. We can still label someone as “late” without knowing exactly how late they were.
E
does not specify how long Thibodeaux has been an officer
The length of time Thibodeaux has been an officer is irrelevant. None of the conditions in the rule concerning suspension relate to years of experience as an officer.