Miranda: Yet the issue of pain is not the crux of the matter. Experimentation on any nonhuman animal undermines respect for life itself because only humans are capable of consenting to an experiment. Since any activity that undermines respect for life diminishes the quality of all of our lives, the new regulations should ban all such experimentation.
Summarize Argument
Jeff argues that proposed regulations on animal experimentation should be extended to all mammals. This is because all mammals are capable of feeling pain.
Notable Assumptions
Jeff assumes that all mammals who feel pain should be protected by the experimentation regulations. This means Jeff doesn’t think the regulations were brought in specifically to protect dogs and horses given the nature of experimentation performed on them. Jeff also doesn’t think that human empathy should factor into the protection a mammal receievs.
A
Regulations on the use of animals in scientific experimentation should be primarily concerned with respecting the feelings of the humans who will perform those experiments.
Irrelevant. Jeff never discusses the feelings of the humans involved.
B
Whatever means are used to determine whether dogs and horses feel pain should also be used to determine whether other animals feel pain.
We don’t care how it was determined that all mammals feel pain. We care about how that fact should affect experimentation regulations.
C
Only those experiments on animals that are known to cause those animals pain should be prohibited.
This is irrelevant. There may be other experiments that should be prohibited for other reasons, and that has no bearing whatsoever on Jeff’s argument.
D
Scientists who perform experiments on animals should empathize with any mammal as much as they empathize with dogs or horses.
We don’t care about how much scientists empathize with the subjects of their experiments. We care about the regulations that should be put in place.
E
Scientific experimentation should be prohibited on any creature that is capable of feeling pain.
According to Jeff, mammals shouldn’t be experimented on if they feel pain. His claim falls under this principle, which says no animals at all should be experimented on if they feel pain.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that the relaxing of regulations for the manufacturing of new drugs to increase their availability should not come with relaxation of regulations for industrial activity in general. As support for the general claim made in the conclusion, the author cites a specific case: endangered plants and animals will become extinct without strict environmental regulations. Many new medicines come from plants and animals, so the extinction of plants and animals resulting from relaxation of regulations could impair the medicine development.
Identify Argument Part
The statement in the question stem serves to demonstrate how general relaxation of regulations could negatively impact the manufacture of new medicines. It connects the extinction of plants and animals with the availability and development of new medicines.
A
a reason for not restricting research into the medical usefulness of plants and animals
Plants and animals are brought up in the argument to support the importance of environmental regulations; the author does not take a position on whether or not research into medical uses for plants and animals should be restricted.
B
evidence for a point of view that the argument is designed to undermine
The statement in the question stem is used as support for the author’s argument; it is not used as support for an argument with which the author disagrees.
C
an illustration of the potential disaster that could result from continued overregulation of industrial activity
The claim in the question stem is used to support the value of environmental regulations; the claim is not used to argue against overregulation of industrial activity. Further, there is no illustration of potential disaster.
D
a link between the extinction of species and the potentially decreased availability of new medicines
The statement in the question stem demonstrates the connection between environmental regulation and continued manufacture and sale of new medicines; it shows why a lack of environmental regulations could have a negative impact on drug availability.
E
support for the hypothesis that only very narrowly focused efforts at deregulation of industrial activity actually have beneficial results
The hypothesis in (E) is not the a claim made in the argument; the author is only saying that we should not lift all industrial regulations.
Councilperson Y: Helping to ensure the lowest electricity rates is not the council’s only job; we also have an obligation not to lower the quality of life of our community. A plant of the type specified by the design would damage our community’s air quality to such an extent that the benefit of lower rates would be outweighed.
Speaker 1 Summary
If it is agreed that we have no choice but to approve construction of a new plant, we must endorse the proposed design for the new generating station. Why? Because the design would clearly allow for the lowest electricity rates and we are obligated to ensure these rates are as low as possible.
Speaker 2 Summary
We don’t have to endorse the proposed design for the new generating station. Why? Because the design would damage the community’s air quality more than the community would benefit from lower rates. Ensuring lower rates is not our only job, we must also not lower the quality of life for the community.
Objective
We need a statement that Councilperson X and Y disagree on. They disagree on whether the council should endorse the proposed design for the new generating station. X thinks it must be endorsed, and Y thinks not due to a cost-benefit analysis.
A
The council should recommend the building of a new generating station.
Neither speaker expresses an opinion on this statement. X states that the proposed design should be endorsed if it is agreed that there’s no choice but to approve a new plant, but we don’t know if there is consensus about that choice.
B
It is the council’s responsibility to improve the community’s quality of life.
Councilperson X never expresses an opinion regarding the community’s quality of life. We can’t assume that the lowest possible electricity rates improve quality of life.
C
A plant of the type specified by the design in question would damage the air quality of the community.
Councilperson X never expresses an opinion regarding whether the proposed design would damage the air quality. X only points to the fact that the design would allow for low electricity rates.
D
If a new generating station is to be built, the council should endorse a plant of the type specified by the design in question.
Councilperson X and Y disagree on this statement. X agrees that the council should endorse the design because it would allow for the lowest possible electricity rates. Y disagrees because Y thinks that the costs of the design outweigh the benefits.
E
A plant of the type specified by the design in question would allow for the lowest electricity rates.
Councilperson Y does not express an opinion on this statement. Y concedes that the proposed design would allow for low electricity rates, but we don’t know if Y believes that these rates would be the lowest possible.
</section
Summary
Good students learn more than what their parents and teachers require them to learn. This requires that these students derive pleasure from the satisfaction of their curiosity. On cannot experience such pleasure unless one is capable of concentrating on a topic so intently that one loses track of one’s own identity.
Notable Valid Inferences
Good students are not capable of concentrating on a topic so intently that one loses track of one’s own identity.
Good students do not derive pleasure from the satisfaction of their curiosity.
Good students do not derive pleasure from the satisfaction of their curiosity.
A
Some people who are capable of becoming so absorbed in a topic that they lose track of their own identities are nevertheless incapable of deriving pleasure from the satisfaction of their curiosity.
Could be true. As shown below, concentrating intently is the necessary condition for our sufficient condition of deriving pleasure. A necessary condition may occur without the sufficient condition.
B
Most good students do not derive pleasure from the satisfaction of their curiosity.
Must be false. As shown below, deriving pleasure is a necessary condition for being a good student.
C
Many people who derive pleasure simply from the satisfaction of their curiosity are not good students.
Could be true. As shown below, deriving pleasure is a necessary condition for our sufficient condition of being a good student. A necessary condition may occur without the sufficient condition.
D
Some people who are not good students derive pleasure from losing track of their own identities.
Could be true. As shown below, deriving pleasure is a necessary condition for our sufficient condition of being a good student. A necessary condition may occur without the sufficient condition.
E
Most people who are capable of becoming so absorbed in a topic that they lose track of their own identities are not good students.
Could be true. As shown below, concentrating intently is a necessary condition for our sufficient condition of being a good student. A necessary condition may occur without the sufficient condition.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that parents should reduce the amount of stimulation that their babies receive. The author references a study in which babies with a less stimulating daytime routine slept an average of two hours more each day compared to babies with a more stimulating daytime routine. To connect this study to the conclusion, the author claims that sleep is very important for children’s development.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that sleeping more is better for babies––what if there is a point at which too much sleep becomes detrimental? Also, the author assumes that the studies were conducted in a way that allows their results to be applied to babies in general. The author also assumes that sleep would be better for babies than the stimulation that is being sacrificed in order to enhance their sleep.
A
Babies’ muscular coordination is unaffected by the amount of stimulation they receive.
The argument connects stimulation to sleep, and assumes that more sleep is better for babies. Muscular coordination being unaffected by stimulation is unrelated to the argument.
B
Babies with less stimulating routines usually get extra sleep during the day.
Whether the sleep occurred during the day or at night is not relevant to the argument; the argument only discusses average sleep time.
C
Studies showed no correlation between stimulation and amount of sleep for children three years of age or older.
The argument is about infants and discusses a study on six month old babies. Facts about children three years old and older is not relevant to the argument.
D
The babies who had a less stimulating routine gained weight at an average rate.
We don’t know anything about the weight gain of babies with a more stimulating routine. (D) just gives a separate fact about an unrelated factor for one of the two groups of babies, so this does not weaken the judgement made in the argument.
E
The stimulation that babies receive helps them to develop intellectually.
(E) introduces an aspect of net effect. (E) shows that babies with a less stimulating daytime routine may be missing out on intellectual development. This weakens the argument because it provides a reason that a more stimulating daytime routine may be beneficial.