Summary
The author concludes that new animated films aimed at adults are not appropriate for children. This is because in order for an animated film to be appropriate for children, it must be innocently whimsical, but not threatening. However, the new animated films for adults have dark themes.
Missing Connection
We know that in order for an animated film to be appropriate for children, it must be innocently whimsical and not threatening. Do we know whether the new animated films are threatening, or whether they lack the quality of innocent whimsy? No; all we know is that the new animated films involve dark themes. To make the argument valid, we want to learn that films involving dark themes are threatening or lack innocent whimsy.
A
Films that are whimsical and mischievous are not threatening.
This doesn’t establish that the new films with dark themes are threatening or that they lack innocent whimsy.
B
Films that are appropriate for adults are seldom appropriate for children.
We don’t know whether the new animated films aimed at adults are appropriate for adults. In addition, even if we did, (B) would establish only that they these kinds of films are rarely appropriate for children. That would not guarantee that they are not appropriate for children.
C
Films that have dark themes are threatening.
(C) establishes that the new films with dark themes are threatening. This establishes that they do not meet one of the necessary conditions for being appropriate for children.
D
Children enjoy films only if the films include animation.
(D) doesn’t establish that the new films with dark themes are threatening or that they lack innocent whimsy.
E
Children do not attend to some details in films aimed at adults.
(E) doesn’t establish that the new films with dark themes are threatening or that they lack innocent whimsy.
Economist: There have been large declines in employment around the globe, so it’s not surprising that the number of workers injured on the job has decreased. What is surprising, however, is that the percentage of workers injured on the job has also decreased.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
There’s a decrease in the percentage of workers injured on the job.
Objective
Since this is an “Except” question, the correct answer will not explain the decrease in the percentage of workers injured on the job. Wrong answers will explain why workers are less likely now than before to be injured on the job. The correct answer will either not address that likelihood or else make it more likely that workers are injured on the job.
A
Overall, people who are employed are working fewer hours each day.
Employed people are working less than before, so there’re less chances for them to be injured while on the job. Less hours means less opportunities for accidents and mishaps.
B
A decrease in the demand for products has reduced the pressure on workers to meet production quotas and deadlines.
Since workers aren’t working as hard to meet deadlines, they’re less likely to rush into accidents. Moreover, they’re more likely to follow time-consuming workplace-safety protocols if time isn’t an issue.
C
Some of the most dangerous industries have had especially big declines in employment.
There are less people working dangerous jobs relative to the working population than before. Therefore, a lower percentage of people are likely to suffer injuries from dangerous work.
D
There has been a general decline in the resources devoted to workplace safety.
A decline workplace-safety resources suggests workers would actually be more likely to be injured on the job than before. This doesn’t explain why the rate of job-related injuries has actually fallen.
E
Inexperienced workers have lost their jobs at higher rates than experienced ones.
Experienced workers who know how to operate equipment safely have retained their jobs, while inexperienced workers who’re prone to injury have been let go. Hence, a reduction in injuries.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that his museum should return certain ancient artifacts whose ownership is in dispute. This conclusion is based on the principle that an important ancient artifact belongs to the nation on whose territory the artifact was discovered. Museums are obligated to follow this principle, which is why the ancient artifacts under dispute should be returned.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s opinion about what should be done with the artifacts: “[O]ur museum should return the artifacts.”
A
The university museum should return the ancient artifacts in dispute.
This is a restatement of the conclusion.
B
Any important ancient artifact belongs by rights to the nation on whose territory it was discovered.
This describes the principle the author uses as a premise.
C
The ancient artifacts whose ownership is in dispute were obtained legally by the university museum.
This is a concession point, but not the conclusion.
D
The university museum is in possession of several artifacts whose ownership is in dispute.
This is context. The argument concerns what should be done with those artifacts.
E
There is an overriding principle that any important ancient artifact belongs by rights to the nation on whose territory it was discovered.
This is a premise.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that the arts section of the paper is biased toward movies and against local theater. This is based on the fact that in the last year, the paper has published over five times as many movie reviews are review of live plays.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that there’s no other explanation for why the paper published over five times as many movie reviews as reviews of live plays besides bias. The author also assumes that the number of reviews about live plays is representative of the number of reviews of local theatrical productions. (This overlooks the possibility that the paper might have reviewed a lot of other local theatrical productions that weren’t classified as live plays.)
A
Some newspapers do not publish any reviews of live plays.
We’re talking about a particular newspaper that does publish reviews of plays. Whether other newspapers are biased or not biased or whether they publish play reviews or not has no impact on whether this newspaper is biased.
B
The number of movies released last year was significantly greater than the number of live plays performed locally.
This provides a potential alternate explanation for the disparity in publication of movie and play reviews. If there were a lot more movies, we’d expect a lot more movie reviews, even if there was no bias toward or against movies or plays.
C
The newspaper has five movie critics, but only one theater critic.
If anything, this could support the theory of bias. Perhaps the reason the newspaper has more movie critics is because they prefer publishing reviews of movies over reviews of plays.
D
The newspaper does not have the space in the arts section to publish a review of every movie that is released or every live play that is locally performed.
The author never suggested that the newspaper could publish a review of every movie or local play. The author’s simply pointing to the disparity in number of movie and play reviews.
E
The newspaper published more reviews of live plays in the last year than it did two years ago.
We care about the comparison between movie reviews and play reviews. More play reviews last year compared to the past might suggest the newspaper has gotten less biased against plays; but that doesn’t relate to whether the newspaper is more biased toward movies than plays.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that if we want to protect public health, getting people to drive fewer miles would be more impactful than automotive safety measures. This is because traveling by car creates a major risk of traffic fatalities.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s assessment about what measure would contribute most to reducing traffic fatalities: “[W]hat would contribute the most to safeguarding public health is a reduction in total miles traveled on our roads.”
A
Public health can be safeguarded through reducing traffic fatalities.
This might be an assumption of the argument, but it’s not the conclusion. The author’s conclusion concerns the best way to safeguard public health.
B
Those concerned with safeguarding public health should focus their efforts on reducing traffic fatalities.
The conclusion does not tell anyone that they should or should not do something. It’s simply an assessment of what would contribute most to safeguarding public health.
C
Increasing seat belt use, reducing distracted driving, and improving automotive technology all safeguard public health.
This is part of context. But the author’s conclusion is that there’s another method that would contribute more to protecting public health.
D
A reduction in total miles traveled would contribute more to safeguarding public health than would any automotive safety measure.
This is a paraphrase of the conclusion. The author asserted that reducing miles driven contributes the “most” to protecting public health. This means it contributes more than any other method.
E
Traveling by car is itself a major risk factor for traffic fatalities.
This is a premise.