Summarize Argument
Barr concludes that tea is not more popular now than in previous years. As support, he references the fact that the Survey Group, a neutral polling company, found no change in the amount of tea sold over the past 20 years.
Notable Assumptions
Barr assumes that the survey conducted by the Survey Group was conducted with a representative sample that was large enough to produce generalizable results. Barr also assumes that the survey was high quality, and not conducted in a way that would bias the results.
A
The National Tea Association has announced that it plans to carry out its own retail survey in the next year.
The fact that the National Tea Association plans to do its own study does nothing to cast doubt on the validity of the Survey Group’s study; this is irrelevant to Barr’s argument.
B
A survey by an unrelated polling organization shows that the public is generally receptive to the idea of trying new types of tea.
Barr’s argument is about whether or not tea is more popular; the public’s willingness to try new types of tea is irrelevant to how popular tea is in general.
C
The Survey Group is funded by a consortium of consumer advocacy groups.
(C) doesn’t provide any information about how the survey was actually conducted, so it doesn’t weaken the argument.
D
The stores from which the Survey Group collected information about tea sales are all located in the same small region of the country.
This weakens the argument because it shows that the survey wasn’t representative. If all of the stores were from the same small region of the country, then we can only make a conclusion about that specific region; we can’t make broad, generalized conclusions.
E
Tea has been the subject of an expensive and efficient advertising campaign funded, in part, by the National Tea Association.
The argument is about whether or not tea is more popular now; we don’t care about factors that could have impacted the popularity of tea.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that dramatic changes, such as switching to a vegetarian diet, may be necessary for people to reduce their cholesterol levels. As support, the author says that moderate dietary changes are often unsuccessful in lowering cholesterol levels.
Identify Argument Part
The statement in question stem provides support for the conclusion that dramatic changes may be necessary by eliminating the option to take a more moderate path.
A
It is presented to counter doctors’ suggestions that cholesterol levels can be reduced through dietary changes.
The doctors’ recommendations do not specify moderate or dramatic changes, so the claim that moderate changes are often unsuccessful cannot be said to counter the doctors’ suggestions.
B
It is a premise offered in support of the claim that vegetarian diets are more healthful than any diets containing meat.
The argument does not claim that vegetarian diets are more healthful in general; the scope of the argument is limited to cholesterol levels.
C
It is a premise offered in support of the claim that reducing cholesterol levels may require greater than moderate dietary changes.
The statement in the question stem is a premise that supports the claim that dramatic changes may be necessary, because moderate changes often are not enough.
D
It is offered as an explanation of the success of vegetarian diets in reducing cholesterol levels.
The statement in the question stem does not explain why vegetarian diets can be successful; it just demonstrates that moderate dietary changes may not be enough to cause lower cholesterol levels.
E
It is a conclusion for which the claim that dramatic changes in one’s diet are sometimes required to reduce cholesterol levels is offered as support.
(E) mixes up the support relationship; the claim in the question stem is a premise, and the conclusion is the claim that dramatic changes may be needed.
Summary
Revolutionary political parties that oppose the dominant party’s reign and ideology always produce groups that are as different from each other as these groups are different from the dominant party. Even though these groups ignore each other’s differences, these differences are eventually revealed upon victory.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Therefore, a winning revolutionary group must address the differences between the other revolutionary groups if that group wants to stay in power.
A
no victorious insurgent party ever manages to stay in power for as long as the party it displaces did
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus the timeline for any political party to stay in power. To say that no revolutionary party that wins ever stays in power for as long as the displaced party is too strong.
B
a victorious insurgent party must address the disagreements between its factions if it is to stay in power
This answer is strongly supported. If these group’s differences aren’t addressed, then it is probable that the remaining groups will band together to dethrone the new dominant party.
C
the heretofore insurgent party will not always promulgate a new ideology to justify its own policies, once it is victorious
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus whether or not the winning revolutionary party will promote a new ideology. We only know that the ideologies in these parties differ from the party in power, not necessary that these ideologies are “new.”
D
a victorious insurgent party always faces opposition from the party it recently ousted
This answer is unsupported. Whether the revolutionary party will face opposition from the party it dethrones is an assumption that we don’t know will “always” be true.
E
it is impossible for the different factions of a victorious insurgent party to effect the compromises necessary to keep the new party in power
This answer is unsupported. It is too strong to say that agreement among the different revolutionary groups is “impossible.”
Council member Q: To think that there is a lot of pollution based on the discovery of a serious single instance of pollution is simply an application of the widely accepted principle that actions tend to follow the path of least resistance, and it is surely easier to pollute than not to pollute.
Speaker 1 Summary
P supports an unstated conclusion that alarmists do not have sufficient support to conclude that pollution is a major character fault of society. By explaining that alarmists fail to distinguish polluting behavior from people’s tendency not to pollute, P implies that a societal character flaw of pollution does not follow from specific instances of pollution.
Speaker 2 Summary
Q indicates an unstated conclusion that alarmists’ claim is reasonably supported. Q supports this by explaining that actions generally follow the path of least resistance, and it is easier to pollute than not to pollute. This implies that a single incident of pollution is good evidence that more people will be doing the easy thing and polluting.
Objective
We need to find a disagreement. P and Q disagree about whether or not pollution indicates that people generally tend to pollute.
A
pollution should be considered a problem
Neither speaker directly claims that pollution should or shouldn’t be considered a problem. Both P and Q’s arguments are consistent with the idea that pollution is problematic; the dispute is about how widespread we should believe pollution is, not whether it’s a problem.
B
actions tend to follow the path of least resistance
Q makes this claim, but P never disagrees. In fact, P does not express any opinion about whether actions tend to follow the path of least resistance or some other path.
C
people are responsible for pollution
D
people can change their behavior and not pollute
Neither speaker talks about whether polluters can or cannot change their behavior. The discussion focuses on how widespread pollution might be based on available evidence, not the next steps to limit pollution.
E
people are inclined to pollute
P disagrees with this and Q agrees, making this the point of disagreement. P explicitly states that people have a disposition not to pollute. Q claims that actions follow the path of least resistance, which is to pollute, thus implying that people tend to pollute.
Summary
Coffee and tea contain a substance (methylxanthines) that leads to temporary increases in the body’s production of vasopressin. Vasopressin causes clumping of blood cells, and this clumping is more pronounced in women than in men. Increased clumping of blood cells is probably why, compared to men, women have a significantly higher risk of complications following angioplasty, which is an operation for clearing clogged arteries.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
In at least one respect, coffee and tea may be more dangerous to women than to men.
Drinking excessive amounts of coffee or tea may lead to increased risk of complications following angioplasty.
Drinking excessive amounts of coffee or tea may lead to increased risk of complications following angioplasty.
A
Men, but not women, should be given methylxanthines prior to undergoing angioplasty.
Unsupported. We’re not given a reason anyone should be given methylxanthines ever. Maybe there’s nothing positive about methylxanthines.
B
In spite of the risks, angioplasty is the only effective treatment for clogged arteries.
Unsupported. We’re told angioplasty is one technique for unclogging arteries, but we don’t know whether there are any other techniques that could be effective.
C
Women probably drink more coffee and tea, on average, than do men.
Unsupported. The stimulus tells us about the effects of coffee and tea, but not about the number or proportion of men or women who drink coffee and tea.
D
Prior to undergoing angioplasty, women should avoid coffee and tea.
Strongly supported. Women face a higher risk of complications following angioplasty because clumping of blood cells is more pronounced in their bodies. Since coffee/tea increase substances that lead to clumping, there’s reason for women to avoid coffee/tea before angioplasty.
E
Angioplasty should not be used to treat clogged arteries.
Unsupported. Angioplasty may lead to complications, but that doesn’t imply that the technique is not worth the risk of complications.