Dentist: I recommend brushing one’s teeth after every meal to remove sugars that facilitate the growth of certain bacteria; these bacteria produce acid that dissolves minerals in tooth enamel, resulting in cavities. And when brushing is not practical, I recommend chewing gum—even gum that contains sugar—to prevent the formation of cavities.

"Surprising" Phenomenon

Why would chewing sugary gum after a meal help to prevent cavities when sugar is known to lead to the formation of cavities?

Objective

The right answer will be a hypothesis that explains why chewing gum after a meal helps to prevent the formation of cavities. That explanation must offer some dental hygiene benefit of chewing gum that has the potential to outweigh any damage that could be caused by the sugar in some gums.

A
A piece of chewing gum that contains sugar contains far less sugar than does the average meal.

We would expect this to be true—think of how small a piece of gum is! This answer doesn’t explain why chewing gum helps to prevent cavities, though, so it doesn’t reconcile the paradox in the stimulus.

B
Tooth decay can be stopped and reversed if it is caught before a cavity develops.

While this might be relieving to hear on a personal level, it doesn’t help to reconcile the paradox at hand. We need information about how chewing gum after meals helps to prevent cavities, and this answer choice doesn’t give us that.

C
Chewing gum stimulates the production of saliva, which reduces acidity in the mouth and helps remineralize tooth enamel.

This is helpful! Sugar leads to cavities because it causes enamel to dissolve, but chewing gum protects enamel. It makes sense, then, that chewing gum after meals helps to prevent cavities even if the gum contains some sugar.

D
Sugars can be on teeth for as long as 24 hours before the teeth-damaging bacteria whose growth they facilitate begin to proliferate.

This answer choice has nothing to do with the cavity-prevention benefits of chewing gum after meals, which is what we need the answer to explain!

E
Chewing gum exercises and relaxes the jaw muscles and so contributes to the overall health of the oral tract.

This answer doesn’t help because it has nothing to do with the impact that chewing gum has on cavity formation. The “overall health of the oral tract” could refer to factors other than cavities.


7 comments

When the ancient fossils of a primitive land mammal were unearthed in New Zealand, they provided the first concrete evidence that the island country had once had indigenous land mammals. Until that discovery, New Zealand had no known native land mammals. The discovery thus falsifies the theory that New Zealand’s rich and varied native bird population owes its existence to the lack of competition from mammals.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that New Zealand’s rich and varied native bird population was not caused by the lack of competition from mammals. This is based on evidence that New Zealand once had indigenous land mammals.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that the indigenous land mammals on New Zealand existed at the same time as New Zealand’s birds existed. The author also assumes that there were enough members of indigenous land mammal species to create competitive pressure with New Zealand’s birds.

A
The unearthed land mammal is only one of several ancient land mammals that were indigenous to New Zealand.
The number of different kinds of mammals doesn’t impact the significance of the evidence. And even if it did, (A) might strengthen by providing additional reason to think birds faced competition from mammals.
B
The recently discovered land mammal became extinct long before the native bird population was established.
This undermines the assumption that the indigenous land mammal recently discovered actually competed with New Zealand’s birds. If it was extinct before the birds came around, it’s not evidence that birds faced competition from land mammals.
C
The site at which the primitive land mammal was unearthed also contains the fossils of primitive reptile and insect species.
The argument concerns competition between birds and land mammals. Reptiles and insects are not mammals and are therefore irrelevant.
D
Countries with rich and varied native land mammal populations do not have rich and varied native bird populations.
We know NZ has a rich and varied bird population, which, in connection with (D), would imply that it doesn’t have a rich and varied population of land mammals. But this doesn’t affect anything concerning the recently discovered mammal and how it might have affected birds.
E
Some other island countries that are believed to have no native land mammals in fact had indigenous land mammals at one time.
Whether other island countries also had indigenous land mammals doesn’t affect whether the recently discovered land mammal on New Zealand implies that birds had competition from land mammals.

6 comments

Restaurant owner: The newspaper reporter who panned my restaurant acknowledges having no special expertise about food and its preparation. His previous job was as a political reporter. He is a good writer, but he is not a true restaurant critic. A newspaper would never call someone a drama critic who had no special training in theater.

Summarize Argument
The restaurant owner concludes that the critic who panned her restaurant is not a true restaurant critic. This is because the critic has no special expertise about food.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is about the critic who panned the owner’s restaurant: “he is not a true restaurant critic.”

A
The newspaper reporter who panned the restaurant acknowledges having no special expertise about food and its preparation.
This is a premise that the restaurant owner uses to demonstrate that the critic isn’t a true restaurant critic. She uses the analogy of a drama critic to show that special expertise is required to be called a “true critic.”
B
The previous job of the newspaper reporter who panned the restaurant was as a political reporter.
This is support for the restaurant owner’s claim about the critic not being a “true critic.” A background in political reporting is very different than expertise in food and food preparation.
C
The newspaper reporter who panned the restaurant is a good writer.
The restaurant owner concedes that the critic is a good writer but maintains he isn’t a true critic. This is neither a premise nor a conclusion, as it does’t add to the restaurant owner’s argument.
D
The newspaper reporter who panned the restaurant is not a true restaurant critic.
This is what the restaurant owner is arguing for. Since the reporter lacks expertise in food and food preparation, and since no one would call someone a drama critic without expertise in their analogous field, the reporter isn’t a true critic.
E
A newspaper would never call someone a drama critic who had no special training in theater.
This is a premise used to show why the reporter in question isn’t a true critic. Since no one would call someone a critic in an analogous field without expertise, the reporter shouldn’t be called a restaurant critic without food expertise.

2 comments

Library preservationist: Due to the continual physical deterioration of the medieval manuscripts in our library’s collection, we have decided to restore most of our medieval manuscripts that are of widely acknowledged cultural significance, though this means that some medieval manuscripts whose authenticity is suspect will be restored. However, only manuscripts whose safety can be ensured during the restoration process will be restored, and manuscripts that are not frequently consulted by researchers will not be restored.

Summary

Most of our medieval manuscripts that are of widely acknowledged cultural significance will be restored, and some medieval manuscripts whose authenticity is suspect will be restored. Only manuscripts whose safety can be ensured during restoration and manuscripts frequently consulted by researchers will be restored.

Notable Valid Inferences

Some medieval manuscipts whose authenticity is suspect are frequently consulted by researchers.

Some medieval manuscripts whose authenticity is suspect can have their safety ensured during restoration.

Most medieval manuscripts that are of widely acknowledged cultural significance are frequently consulted by researchers.

A
Some of the medieval manuscripts whose authenticity is suspect are frequently consulted by researchers.

Must be true. As shown below, we can combine the statements that some manuscripts whose authenticity is suspect will be restored and that only frequently consulted manuscripts will be restored.

B
All of the medieval manuscripts widely acknowledged to be of cultural significance are manuscripts whose safety can be ensured during the restoration process.

Could be false. The stimulus tells us that most manuscripts widely acknowledged to be of cultural significance will be restored. We cannot infer an “all” statement from a “most” statement.

C
All of the medieval manuscripts whose safety can be ensured during the restoration process are frequently consulted by researchers.

Could be false. As shown on our diagram, there are no necessary conditions attached to the condition of a manuscript’s safety being ensured. It is possible that some manuscripts exist whose safety can be ensured but are not frequently consulted.

D
The medieval manuscripts most susceptible to deterioration are those most frequently consulted by researchers.

Could be false. The stimulus does not give us any information to determine what manuscripts are most susceptible to deterioration. This answer choice is outside of the scope of our conditions.

E
None of the medieval manuscripts that are rarely consulted by researchers is widely acknowledged to be of cultural significance.

Could be false. The stimulus does not give us any information about manuscripts that are rarely consulted by researchers. This answer choice is outside of the scope of our conditions.


28 comments

Direct-mail advertising usually consists of advertisements for products to be purchased from the home, so the perception that it is bad for the environment is misguided. Because of direct-mail advertising, millions of people buy products by phone or online—products whose purchase would otherwise require the use of a car, thus adding pollutants to the air.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that direct-mail advertising is not bad for the environment. This is because direct-mail advertising usually advertises products to be purchased from home. This leads to millions of people buying products from home. If they didn’t purchase these products at home, purchase of these products would require using a car, which would add pollutants to the air.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that a significant proportion of the products bought as a result of direct-mail advertising would still be bought had direct-mail advertising not existed. The author also assumes that there’s no aspect of purchases from home that produce more environmental damage than those purchases would have been had they been purchased after using a car.

A
Although the primary intent of most direct-mail advertisers is to convince people to buy products from their homes, direct mail can also lead to increased sales in stores by customers who prefer to see a product prior to purchasing it.
This weakens the argument by showing that direct-mail advertising might increase sales in stores, which would generally require use of a car, which would add pollutants to the air.
B
Most of the products purchased in response to direct-mail advertisements would be purchased even without the direct-mail advertisements.
This confirms that without direct-mail advertising, pollutants from in-person sales would actually have occurred. In theory, direct-mail advertisements might have just caused purchases that otherwise wouldn’t have occurred. (B) eliminates this possibility.
C
A person who receives and reads a direct-mail advertisement is more likely to purchase the product advertised than is a person who reads an advertisement for a product in a magazine that they subscribe to.
The comparative effectiveness of direct-mail ads and magazine ads has no clear impact. We already know that people buy products from home due to direct-mail ads. Even if these are more effective than others, we still don’t know the environmental impact of direct-mail ads.
D
Usually, a company that sends out direct-mail advertisements has good reason to think that the person to whom the advertisement is sent would be more interested in the product than would the average person.
(D), unlike (B) doesn’t establish that the people who buy products from home would have bought those products without the direct-mail ads. There might be signs those people are more interested in the products, but that doesn’t mean they would buy without the ads.
E
Products purchased as the result of direct-mail advertising comprise an increasingly large portion of the consumer products purchased each year.
This doesn’t reveal anything about the environmental impact of direct-mail ads. We still don’t know whether direct-mail ads are causing people to buy from home products that would otherwise be purchased by using a car.

49 comments