Columnist: Wildlife activists have proposed that the practice of stringing cable TV lines from the same poles that carry electric power lines should be banned because cable TV lines, while electrically neutral themselves, make it easier for animals to climb near electric power lines, risking electrocution. This particular argument for banning the practice fails, however, since some animals are electrocuted by power lines even where cable TV lines are all underground.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The columnist concludes that, although animals are at higher risk of electrocution when cable TV lines are strung alongside electric power lines, this fact alone doesn’t show that cable TV lines should be put elsewhere. As a premise, the columnist states that putting cable TV lines elsewhere wouldn’t fully eliminate the electrocution problem, since some animals are electrocuted by power lines even without the help of cable TV lines.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The columnist argues that, although an intended solution to a problem will help alleviate the problem, said alleviation isn’t a good enough reason to take that action, because it won’t entirely eliminate the problem. This reasoning is flawed, because alleviating a problem can be a very good reason to take an action, even if the action won’t completely solve the problem!

A
It takes a sufficient condition for an argument’s being inadequate to be a necessary condition for its being inadequate.
The columnist’s reason for the argument’s inadequacy is neither sufficient nor necessary for the argument to be inadequate, so we’re not dealing with a flaw of sufficiency vs. necessity.
B
It rejects an argument for a proposal merely on the grounds that the proposal would not completely eliminate the problem it is intended to address.
The columnist rejects the wildlife activists’ proposal solely because it won’t completely stop animals from being electrocuted by power lines. But the proposal would still lead to fewer animal electrocutions, which could be reason enough to adopt it!
C
It fails to consider the additional advantageous effects that a proposal to address a problem might have.
The columnist did not say that the proposal shouldn’t be adopted, just that it shouldn’t be adopted based on the wildlife activists’ argument. There was therefore no need to consider any possible additional advantageous effects.
D
It rejects an argument by criticizing the argument’s proponents rather than by criticizing its substance.
The columnist does not criticize the wildlife activists.
E
It rejects a proposal to address a problem merely on the grounds that other proposals to address the problem would also be effective.
The columnist does not mention any other proposals for addressing animal electrocutions by power lines.

10 comments

The ancient reptile Thrinaxodon, an ancestor of mammals, had skull features suggesting that it had sensory whiskers. If Thrinaxodon had whiskers, it clearly also had hair on other parts of its body, which would have served as insulation that regulated body temperature. Therefore, Thrinaxodon was probably warm-blooded, for such insulation would be of little use to a cold-blooded animal.

Summarize Argument

The author concludes that Thrinaxodon was probably warm-blooded. As support, the author says that its skull suggests that it had whiskers. The author then provides the following conditional premise: If Thrinaxodon had whiskers→ Thrinaxodon had hair elsewhere on its body. The author claims that this hair elsewhere on its body would have regulated its body temperature. The evidence cited by the author affirms the sufficient condition (that Thrinaxodon probably had whiskers), so we can say that it probably had hair elsewhere. Since cold-blooded animals would have little use for insulation, the author concludes that Thrinaxodon was probably warm blooded.

Identify Argument Part

The statement in the question stem provides support for the claim that Thrinaxodon was warm-blooded, because a cold-blooded animal would have little use for such insulation.

A
It is a premise offered in support of the conclusion that insulation regulating body temperature would be of little use to a cold-blooded animal.

The conclusion of the argument is not that insulation regulating body temperature would be of little use to a cold-blooded animal; rather, the conclusion is that Thrinaxodon was probably warm-blooded.

B
It is a premise offered in support of the main conclusion drawn in the argument.

The statement in the question stem is a premise that supports the conclusion that Thrinaxodon was probably warm-blooded, since cold-blooded animals would have little such for such insulation.

C
It is a conclusion for which the claim that Thrinaxodon had skull features suggesting that it had sensory whiskers is offered as support.

The claim in the question stem is not a conclusion, it is a premise.

D
It is a statement of a hypothesis that the argument attempts to show is false.

The claim in the question stem is used to support the argument’s conclusion; the argument is not trying to show that this information is false.

E
It is offered as an explanation of the phenomenon described by the argument’s main conclusion, but it is not itself used to provide support for that conclusion.

The statement in the question stem does provide support for the conclusion, so (E) is descriptively inaccurate.


12 comments

Economist: Currently, many countries rely primarily on taxing income to fund government expenditures. But taxing income does nothing to promote savings and investment. Taxing consumption, on the other hand, would encourage savings. The most important challenge facing these countries is improving their economies, and the only way to accomplish this is to increase their savings rates. Hence, _______.

Summary

Many countries primarily rely on taxing income to support government spending. Taxing income does not promote savings and investment. In contrast, taxing consumption would encourage saving. In these countries, the biggest challenge is improving their economies. The only way to accomplish this is to increase savings rates.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

Hence, many countries should primarily tax consumption as opposed to income.

A
most governments should stop taxing savings and investment

This answer is unsupported. To say that most governments should take action is too strong. The stimulus is limited to “many” countries, not most countries.

B
the economies of countries will rapidly improve if their governments adopt tax policies that encourage savings and investment

This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus whether these countries’ economies would improve rapidly. It could be the case that they improve slowly, or gradually.

C
in most countries taxes on consumption alone could raise adequate revenues to fund government expenditures

This answer is unsupported. To say that most countries could achieve this is too strong. The stimulus is limited to “many” countries, not most countries.

D
the tax laws of many countries should be revised to focus on taxing consumption rather than income

This answer is strongly supported. We know from the stimulus that taxing consumption encourages savings. Therefore, this would be a better strategy for improving savings rates than taxing income.

E
it is detrimental to the economic improvement of any country to continue to tax income

This answer is unsupported. To say that this is detrimental to any country is too strong. The stimulus is limited to “many” countries, not any country.


7 comments