Editorial: The gates at most railroad crossings, while they give clear warning of oncoming trains, are not large enough to prevent automobile drivers from going around them onto the tracks. Some people claim that the ensuing accidents are partly the fault of the railroad company, but this is a mistake. Granted, if one has a small child in the house, then one ought to block access to stairs completely; but a licensed driver is a capable adult who should know better.

Summary
The author concludes that accidents that result from cars going around railroad crossing gates are not the fault of the railroad company. This is because the drivers of those cars are adults who should know that they shouldn’t go around railroad crossing gates.
Note that it’s important to translate the conclusion — “this is a mistake” — into “the railroad company is not (at all) at fault.” If you don’t realize that the conclusion is asserting that the railroad company is 0% at fault, you’ll struggle with this question.

Missing Connection
We’re trying to prove that the railroad company is not at fault — not even partially at fault. But the premise doesn’t establish anything about who is or isn’t at fault. So, at a minimum, we want an answer that mentions something about fault.
Moreover, the answer, in connection with the premises, must establish that the railroad company bears no fault at all. If the answer allows the railroad company to possibly bear partial fault, it’s not correct.
Here’s an example answer that could make the argument valid:
If an accident could have been avoided by an adult who should know better than to act in a way that led to the accident, then nobody else is at fault except the adult.

A
The gates could be made larger, yet irresponsible drivers might still be able to go around them onto the tracks.
(A) doesn’t provide any way to assign fault/blame/responsibility away from the railroad company. Are railroad companies at fault for irresponsible drivers going onto the tracks? Maybe; we don’t know.
B
Capable adults have a responsibility to take some measures to ensure their own safety.
(B) might support a claim that the adult drivers who go around railroad crossing gates bear some responsibility for their actions. But (B) doesn’t completely absolve railroad companies from responsibility. Under (B), railroad companies might still be partially at fault.
C
When the warnings of companies are disregarded by capable adults, the adults are fully responsible for any resulting accidents.
(C) establishes that the adults who go around railroad crossing gates, which we know give warnings about trains, bear “full” responsibility for resulting accidents. If the adults are fully responsible, then the railroad company bears no responsibility.
D
Small children are not involved in accidents resulting from drivers going around the gates.
(D) doesn’t provide any way to assign fault/blame/responsibility away from the railroad company. Are railroad companies at fault for irresponsible drivers going onto the tracks? Maybe; we don’t know.
E
Any company’s responsibility to promote public safety is not unlimited.
(E) limits the extent of a railroad company’s responsibility to promote public safety. But it doesn’t guarantee, with respect to the issue of people going around gates at railroad crossing, that railroad companies aren’t at fault for resulting accidents.

13 comments

A new device uses the global positioning system to determine a cow’s location and, when a cow strays outside of its pasture, makes noises in the cow’s ears to steer it back to its home range. Outfitting all of the cattle in a herd with this device is far more expensive than other means of keeping cattle in their pastures, such as fences. The device’s maker nevertheless predicts that ranchers will purchase the device at its current price.

"Surprising" Phenomenon

Why does the device’s maker think that ranchers will buy the device at its current price even though it is far more expensive to use this device on all the cattle in a herd than it is to use some other means of keeping cattle in their pasture?

Objective

The correct answer will be a hypothesis that explains a key characteristic of this device that makes ranchers likely to purchase the device in spite of the fact that it is very costly to outfit all the cattle in a herd with this device.

A
The price of the device will come down appreciably if the device’s maker is able to produce it in large quantities.

The device’s maker predicts that ranchers will buy the device at its current price, so whether its price decreases in the future is irrelevant. Also, (A) does not help to explain why ranchers will purchase the device at its current price.

B
As they graze, cattle in a herd follow the lead of the same few members of the herd.

This highlights a key feature that makes ranchers likely to buy the device, even though it’s expensive to outfit an entire herd with it. The reason is simply that ranchers only need to outfit a few leading cattle, not all of them.

C
The device has been shown not to cause significant stress to cattle.

The device may not cause stress to cattle, but this doesn’t give a reason why ranchers will purchase it despite its cost. Presumably there are other, cheaper means of keeping cattle in their pasture that also don’t cause stress. So what’s so great about this device?

D
The device has been shown to be as effective as fences at keeping cattle in their pastures.

If the device is as effective as fences at keeping cattle in their pastures, but fences are far less expensive, why will the ranchers still purchase the device? We need to highlight a characteristic of this device that will cause ranchers to purchase it.

E
The device’s maker offers significant discounts to purchasers who buy in bulk.

Like (A), the device’s maker predicts that ranchers will buy the device at its current price, so whether it is discounted for bulk purchases is not relevant.


33 comments

Researchers compared the brains of recently deceased people who had schizophrenia with those of recently deceased people who did not have schizophrenia. They found that 35 percent of the former and none of the latter showed evidence of damage to a structure of nerve cells called the subplate. They knew that this damage must have occurred prior to the second fetal trimester, when the subplate controls the development of the connections between the different parts of the brain.

Summary
Researchers compared the brains of recently deceased people with schizophrenia with the brains of recently deceased people without schizophrenia. 35 percent of the brains of the people with schizophrenia showed evidence of damage to the brain’s subplate. None of the people without schizophrenia had evidence of this damage. The researchers knew the damage to the subplate must have occurred before the second fetal trimester. Before the second fetal trimester is when the subplate controls the development of different connections in the brain.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
A possible cause of schizophrenia may occur before a person is born.

A
Roughly 35 percent of people with abnormal brain subplates will eventually have schizophrenia.
This answer is unsupported. This answer flips around the relationship the stimulus is describing. We only know that 35 percent of people with schizophrenia have damage to the subplate.
B
A promising treatment in some cases of schizophrenia is repair of the damaged connections between the different parts of the brain.
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know anything about any possible or promising treatment of schizophrenia.
C
Some people developed schizophrenia because of damage to the brain subplate after the second fetal trimester.
This answer is unsupported. We are told from the stimulus that damage to the subplate prior to the second fetal trimester is a possible cause of schizophrenia.
D
Schizophrenia is determined by genetic factors.
This answer is unsupported. It is unknown whether damage to a brain’s subplate is caused by genetic factors.
E
There may be a cause of schizophrenia that predates birth.
This answer is strongly supported. The damage to a brain’s subplate occurs prior to the second fetal trimester and researchers hypothesize this is a possible cause of schizophrenia.

10 comments