Summary
The author concludes that the party’s policy is inconsistent. This is based on the fact that the party has expressed the following views at different times:
Increasing spending on education is a worthy goal.
The government should not increase spending on education.
Increasing spending on education is a worthy goal.
The government should not increase spending on education.
Notable Assumptions
One view expressed by the party is that increasing spending on education is a worthy goal. Is that inconsistent with, at other times, thinking that the government should not increase spending on education? Not necessarily. Maybe increasing spending on education is a worthy goal, but there are times when there are even more worthy goals, so the government should increase spending for other things instead of education. There’s nothing inherently contradictory about the views expressed.
It’s not clear what we should anticipate, but we should go into the answers with the understanding that the author assumes that the party’s expression of both views is somehow inconsistent.
It’s not clear what we should anticipate, but we should go into the answers with the understanding that the author assumes that the party’s expression of both views is somehow inconsistent.
A
It is inconsistent for a legislator both to claim that increasing spending on education is a worthy goal and to vote against increasing spending on education.
We don’t know that the party voted against increased spending on education. All we know about are views that the party has expressed.
B
A consistent course of action in educational policy is usually the course of action that will reduce spending on education in the long run.
The author doesn’t have to assume anything about effectiveness at reducing spending. The argument simply concerns two views and whether they are inconsistent.
C
Even if a goal is a morally good one, one should not necessarily try to achieve it.
Not necessary, because the argument doesn’t concern what should or should not be achieved. The argument simply concerns two views and whether they are inconsistent.
D
A consistent political policy does not hold that an action that comprises a worthy goal should not be performed.
Necessary, because if it were not true — if a consistent political policy CAN hold that an action that comprises a worthy goal should not be performed — then there’s nothing about the two views that warrants thinking there’s an inconsistent policy. The two views can be part of a consistent policy, if (D) were negated.
E
Members of one political party never have inconsistent views on how to best approach a political issue.
The argument doesn’t concern claims about individual members of a party. It’s about whether the party itself has a policy that’s inconsistent.
Susan: But the major part of that increase occurred in the first 6 months after that legislation was enacted, right after your city’s free neighborhood health clinics opened, and before the vaccination campaign really got going.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Susan implicitly concludes that Yuriko’s argument does not support the conclusion that her city’s campaign to encourage child vaccination should be imitated by Susan’s city. Susan points out that the increase in vaccination in Yuriko’s city mostly preceded the start of the campaign, and more directly followed the opening of free health clinics. This implies that the clinics really caused the increase.
Describe Method of Reasoning
Susan counters Yuriko’s support for the campaign by introducing additional evidence to undermine Yuriko’s assumptions about cause and effect. With evidence about the timing of the rise in vaccination relative to the start of the campaign and the clinics opening, Susan points out a more plausible alternative cause for the rise in vaccination.
A
She denies Yuriko’s assumption that Susan’s city wants to increase the vaccination rate for children.
Susan doesn’t make any assertions about whether or not her city wants to increase the vaccination rate.
B
She cites facts that tend to weaken the force of the evidence with which Yuriko supports her recommendation.
Susan cites the fact that free clinics opened directly before the major rise in vaccination rate, whereas the campaign only started after that rise. This weakens the evidence for Yuriko’s claim that the increase resulted from the campaign.
C
She introduces evidence to show that the campaign Yuriko advocates is only effective for a short period of time.
Susan doesn’t concede that the campaign was effective at all in her argument, for any amount of time.
D
She advances the claim that a campaign such as Yuriko recommends is not necessary because most parents already choose to have their children vaccinated.
Susan doesn’t argue that any campaign for increased vaccination is unnecessary, only that the particular campaign that Yuriko argues Susan’s city should imitate may not be effective.
E
She presents evidence to suggest that vaccination campaigns are usually ineffective.
Susan doesn’t make any claims against the effectiveness of vaccination campaigns in general, only the specific campaign that Yuriko argues Susan’s city should imitate.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the new maps will be far more useful. No evidence is provided for her claim.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that maps compiled using computerized weather data are more useful than maps based on primitive weather data gathered 60 years ago. In truth, this isn’t much of an assumption.
A
Home gardeners can provide information on plant flourishing not available from weather stations.
Home gardeners fill in the picture in the computer-assisted maps. The other maps don’t feature any home gardener input.
B
Some of the weather stations currently in use are more than 60 years old.
We have no idea if these weather stations are used in the new maps. Nor do we have any idea how the age of a weather station affects its ability to provide useful data.
C
Weather patterns can be described more accurately when more information is available.
The newer maps have more data than the old maps. Thus, they can more accurately describe weather patterns.
D
Weather conditions are the most important factor in determining where plants will grow.
These maps are designed to show where plants will grow. Since the new ones have better weather data, they’ll be more helpful.
E
Weather patterns have changed in the past 60 years.
Weather data from 60 years ago, which is what the old maps have, isn’t very helpful.