Summary
After 1712, all new books legally published in a certain country were approved by a censor.
Under the first censor, 50% of the manuscripts submitted to the censor were approved for publication.
Under the second censor, 75% of the manuscripts submitted to the censor were approved for publication.
Under both censors, the number of manuscripts that were approved was the same.
Under the first censor, 50% of the manuscripts submitted to the censor were approved for publication.
Under the second censor, 75% of the manuscripts submitted to the censor were approved for publication.
Under both censors, the number of manuscripts that were approved was the same.
Very Strongly Supported Conclusions
The overall number of manuscripts submitted was higher under the first censor than under the second. This is the only way that the number of manuscripts approved could be the same, but the proportion of manuscripts approved smaller under the first censor.
A
More books critical of Country Y’s government were published before the appointment of the first censor than after it.
We don’t know whether any manucripts were critical of the government or whether the number that were critical were higher or lower under the first censor. Don’t assume that if the censor didn’t approve, the manuscript was critical.
B
The first censor and the second censor prohibited the publication of the same number of book manuscripts.
False, because the first censor prohibited a higher number than the first. The second censor prohibited 25%, while the first prohibited 50%. If the number approved was the same for both censors, then the overall number submitted was higher under the first. 50% of a bigger number is larger than 25% of a smaller number.
C
More book manuscripts were submitted for approval to the first censor than to the second.
Must be true, because 50% were approved under the first, and 75% were approved under the second, but the number approved was the same. For example, let’s say number approved was 6. 50% of 12 submitted = 6 approved. 75% of 8 submitted = 6 approved. 12 is greater than 8.
D
The second censor allowed some book manuscripts to be published that the first censor would have considered critical of Country Y’s government.
Not supported, because we have no idea whether the same kinds of manuscripts were submitted to the second censor. There could be a different set of manuscripts about different subjects and raising different concerns.
E
The number of writers who wrote unpublished manuscripts was greater under the first censor than under the second.
We don’t know anything about the number of writers. We only know about the number of submissions from writers. One writer can submit multiple manuscripts.
Keisha: Anarchists have always been few in number, whereas other ideologies have often spawned mass movements. Therefore, the proportion of anarchists who are violent is possibly greater than the proportion of adherents of other ideologies who are violent.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
In response to Tony’s claim that the association between anarchism and political violence is unwarranted, Keisha concludes that the proportion of violent anarchists is possibly greater in comparison to other ideologies. As evidence, she points out that anarchism has always had few members in comparison with other ideologies.
Describe Method of Reasoning
Keisha counters the position held by Tony. She does this by positioning the small number of violent anarchists in the context of the total population of anarchists. Even if violent anarchists are outnumbered by the violent adherents of other ideologies, the proportion of violent anarchists might be greater than the proportion of violent adherents of other ideologies.
A
She shows that Tony’s conclusion is questionable because Tony bases it on a comparison that inappropriately involves absolute numbers rather than proportions.
The comparison Tony makes is between the absolute number of violent anarchists compared to the absolute number of violent adherents of other ideologies. Keisha thinks Tony’s conclusion is questionable without acknowledging the proportion of violent members in each group.
B
She attempts to undermine Tony’s conclusion by introducing plausible evidence that is incompatible with the evidence Tony offers in support of that conclusion.
The evidence Keisha offers is not incompatible with Tony’s evidence. Rather, Keisha is pointing out that Tony’s conclusion is questionable without considering the factors she mentions.
C
She questions the accuracy of the claims on which Tony bases his conclusion.
Keisha does not question the accuracy of Tony’s claims. Rather, Keisha is pointing out that Tony’s premises do not necessarily support his conclusion because his argument only accounts for absolute numbers instead of proportions.
D
She presents evidence that the two groups Tony has compared have no significant qualities in common.
Keisha’s evidence does not suggest that she thinks the two groups Tony compares have no qualities in common. She acknowledges Tony’s comparison and questions it because Tony fails to consider proportions between groups.
E
She indicates that Tony has adopted questionable criteria for including certain people in the groups he is comparing.
Tony does not provide any criteria for determining who belongs to a certain group.