Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author considers the general principle that only highly evolved species alter the environment to aid their survival and concludes this characteristic is common. As evidence, the author provides an example of some species of plankton. Plankton generate a gas that is converted into particles of sulfate, which causes water vapor to condense and form clouds. More cloud cover causes more sunlight to be reflected so the Earth absorbs less heat. Therefore, these plankton cause the surface of the Earth to be cooler for their benefit.
Describe Method of Reasoning
The author counters a position held by others. She offers a counter example to illustrate that the general principle believed by others is incorrect. If some species of plankton are able to alter the environment for their benefit, then it cannot be true that only highly evolved species have this characteristic.
A
A general principle is used to justify a claim made about a particular case to which that principle has been shown to apply.
The author’s argument counters the general principle believed by others. The particular case of certain species of plankton counters this general principle.
B
An explanation of how a controversial phenomenon could have come about is given in order to support the claim that this phenomenon did in fact come about.
The author does not address any phenomenon that is controversial. We cannot assume that because certain species of plankton act contrary to what others believe that the behavior of these plankton is controversial.
C
A generalization about the conditions under which a certain process can occur is advanced on the basis of an examination of certain cases in which that process did occur.
The author’s argument counters the general principle believed by others. The general principle believed by others is not a generalization about conditions a certain process can occur. Rather, the generalization is about what kinds of species can alter their environment.
D
A counterexample to a position being challenged is presented in order to show that this position is incorrect.
The position being challenged is the general principle that only highly evolved species can alter their environment to aid their own survival. The counterexample the author provides to counter this position is the case of certain species of plankton.
E
A detailed example is used to illustrate the advantage of one strategy over another.
The author does not compare strategies. The author’s argument only presents one strategy that certain species of plankton use.
Smoker: But it is equally well established that regularly eating high-fat, high-cholesterol foods causes as many serious health problems as does smoking, yet it would be manifestly unreasonable to force those who purchase such foods to bear the burden of financing this campaign.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
In response to the politician’s claim that the new nationwide health-awareness campaign should be funded by increasing taxes on cigarettes, the smoker counters that regularly eating high-fat and high-cholesterol foods cause as many serious health problems as smoking. Moreover, the smoker states it would be unreasonable to force consumers of these foods to bear the burden of financing the campaign.
Describe Method of Reasoning
The smoker counters the position held by the politician. He does this by providing a counterexample. If consuming certain foods cause as many serious health problems as smoking, but it would be unreasonable for the consumers of these foods to bear the burden of financing the campaign, then it is likely equally unreasonable for smokers to bear the burden of financing the campaign.
A
offers a counterexample that calls into question the politician’s reasoning
The counterexample is the people who consume high-fat and high-cholesterol foods. The politician’s reasoning questionable because, if it is unreasonable to force these people to fund the campaign, then it is likely unreasonable to force smokers to fund the campaign.
B
presents an alternative solution to that proposed by the politician
The smoker does not propose any solution.
C
argues that the method proposed by the politician would be inadequate for its intended purpose
The smoker does not state that the politician’s proposal is inadequate. Rather, the smoker implies that the politician’s proposal is unfair because similarly situated groups would not bear the burden of financing the campaign.
D
questions the accuracy of the information cited by the politician in reaching a conclusion
The smoker does not question the politician’s premises. In fact, the smoker concedes that smoking causes as many serious health problems compared to ingesting high-fat and high-cholesterol foods.
E
illustrates how the politician’s proposal could aggravate the problem it is intended to solve
The smoker does not suggest that the politician’s proposal would cause people to smoke more cigarettes.
Ralph: Many very lonely people live in towns. What is needed to avoid loneliness is not only the proximity of other people but also genuine interaction with them.
Summarize Argument
In response to Laura’s claim that Harold should move into town, Ralph concludes that avoiding loneliness requires proximity to other people and genuine interaction with them. As evidence, he states that there are many very lonely people who live in towns.
Describe Method of Reasoning
Ralph qualifies the position held by Laura. He does this by suggesting that proximity to other people is not alone sufficient to avoid loneliness. In addition to proximity, it is necessary for a person to have genuine interaction with others in order to avoid loneliness.
A
something needed for a certain result does not necessarily guarantee that result
The something needed is proximity to other people, and the certain result is the avoidance of loneliness. Ralph thinks that proximity alone does not guarantee avoiding loneliness because a person also needs genuine interaction.
B
what is appropriate in one case is not necessarily appropriate in all cases
Ralph’s claims are made generally as applied to all cases.
C
what is logically certain is not always intuitively obvious
Ralph does not address what is or is not intuitively obvious.
D
various alternative solutions are possible for a single problem
Ralph does not propose any alternative solutions. Instead, Ralph qualifies the solution Laura proposes.
E
a proposed solution for a problem could actually worsen that problem
Ralph does not suggest that the problem of loneliness would worsen. Rather, he claims that proximity alone is insufficient.
Summary
Flavonoids are a common part of almost all plants.
A certain kind of flavonoid in apples is an antioxidant.
Antioxidants are a factor in preventing heart disease.
A certain kind of flavonoid in apples is an antioxidant.
Antioxidants are a factor in preventing heart disease.
Very Strongly Supported Conclusions
There’s at least one flavonoid that can help prevent heart disease (the flavonoid that’s in apples).
A
A diet composed largely of fruits and vegetables will help to prevent heart disease.
This isn’t supported, because we don’t know whether fruits and vegetables besides apples contain antioxidants. And we don’t know whether the diet described in (A) includes apples.
B
Flavonoids are essential to preventing heart disease.
We know some flavonoids can help prevent heart disease (because some are antioxidants). This doesn’t tell us whether flavonoids are necessary for preventing heart disease. Something can be a factor without being necessary.
C
Eating at least one apple each day will prevent heart disease.
We know something in apples is a factor in preventing heart disease. This doesn’t imply that eating at least one apple is guaranteed to prevent heart disease. This is too extreme to be supported. Something can be a factor in preventing heart disease without always preventing it.
D
At least one type of flavonoid helps to prevent heart disease.
We know that the flavonoid in apples helps prevent heart disease, because it’s an antioxidant.
E
A diet deficient in antioxidants is a common cause of heart disease.
We don’t know what is a common cause of heart disease. We know nothing about common causes of heart disease from the stimulus.