Cartographer: Maps are like language: they can be manipulated in order to mislead. That most people are not generally misled by words, however, should not lead us to think that most people are not susceptible to being misled by maps. Most people are taught to be cautious interpreters of language, but education in the sophisticated use of maps is almost nonexistent.

Summarize Argument
The cartographer concludes that we shouldn’t think people aren’t misled by maps, even though they’re rarely misled by words. People are taught to be cautious about language, but there’s virtually no education about maps.

Identify Argument Part
The referenced text supports the conclusion. It’s part of a distinction that shows why conclusions about how people process language can’t be applied to how people process maps.

A
It is offered as an analogical case that helps to clarify the meaning of the argument’s conclusion.
The cartographer is arguing that a conclusion can’t be drawn from the analogy between maps and language. The referenced text doesn’t clarify the meaning of the argument’s conclusion—it helps spell out why maps and language are dissimilar cases.
B
It is a conclusion drawn from the claim that education in the sophisticated use of maps is almost nonexistent.
The referenced text isn’t a conclusion. There’s no support for the claim that people are taught to be cautious interpreters of language.
C
It is part of a distinction drawn in order to support the argument’s conclusion.
The referenced text distinguishes how people are educated in language from how people are educated in maps. In turn, this distinction supports the conclusion that we shouldn’t assume people won’t be misled by maps simply because they’re not misled by language.
D
It is offered as support for the contention that maps have certain relevant similarities to language.
We don’t have relevant similarities here. Instead, we have relevant dissimilarities in how people are educated. The referenced text helps demonstrate those.
E
It is the conclusion drawn in the argument.
There’s no support for the referenced text, so it can’t be a conclusion. Instead, it’s support for the linguist’s main conclusion—we shouldn’t believe most people aren’t susceptible to being misled by maps.

12 comments

Technician: Laboratory mice that are used for research aimed at improving human health are usually kept in small cages. Such an environment is neither normal nor healthy for mice. Moreover, the reliability of research using animals is diminished if those animals are not in an environment that is normal for them.

Summary

Keeping animals in an environment that isn’t normal for them reduces the reliability of the research that those animals are used in.

Lab mice that are used in research for human health are usually kept in small cages.

Small cages are not a normal or healthy environment for mice.

Very Strongly Supported Conclusions

Keeping lab mice in small cages reduces the reliability of the research that those mice are used in.

The reliability of research for human health using lab mice is diminished because the mice are kept in small cages.

A
The conditions under which laboratory mice are kept are not likely to change in the near future.

Unsupported. We only know that lab mice used in research for human health are usually kept in small cages currently. This might or might not change in the near future.

B
If laboratory mice were kept under better conditions, it would be appropriate to use them for research aimed at improving human health.

Unsupported. The reliability of current health research is reduced because mice are kept in small cages. But we don't know how better conditions would impact the research. The technician also doesn’t mention whether it's "appropriate" to use lab mice for research.

C
Research using laboratory mice that is aimed at improving human health is compromised by the conditions under which the mice are kept.

Very strongly supported. Human health research using lab mice is compromised because the mice are kept in an environment that isn’t normal for them, which reduces the reliability of the research they’re used in.

D
Those who conduct research aimed at improving human health will develop new research techniques.

Unsupported. The technique of using lab mice is unreliable because the mice are kept in small cages. But the technician doesn’t say anything about whether researchers will develop new techniques.

E
Laboratory mice that are used for research that is not directly related to human health are not usually kept in small cages.

Unsupported. We only know that lab mice that are used in research that is directly related to human health are usually kept in small cages. We don’t know anything about the conditions of lab mice used in other research.


7 comments

“Dumping” is defined as selling a product in another country for less than production cost. Shrimp producers from Country F are selling shrimp in Country G below the cost of producing shrimp in Country G. So Country F’s producers are dumping shrimp.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that Country F’s producers are dumping (selling below production costs in a different country) shrimp. This is because shrimp producers in Country F are selling shrimp in Country G for less than it takes to produce shrimp in Country G.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that “production cost” refers to the production cost in the country where the product is sold. If “production cost” in fact referred to the production cost in the country where the product is produced, then the production cost in Country G would be irrelevant.

A
“production cost” in the definition of dumping refers to the cost of producing the product in the country where it originates or in the country where it is sold
If “production cost” refers to the country where the product originates, then the author’s argument falls apart since the product doesn’t originate in Country G. If it refers to the country where it’s sold, the argument stands—the product is sold and produced in Country G.
B
there is agreement among experts about whether dumping is harmful to the economy of the country in which products are sold for less than production cost
The author never makes any judgement about dumping being harmful.
C
shrimp producers from Country F charge more for shrimp that they sell within their own country than for shrimp that they sell in Country G
We don’t care how much shrimp producers in Country F charge within Country F. We care if they sell for less than the production cost in another country, which is what constitutes dumping.
D
shrimp producers from Country F will eventually go out of business if they continue to sell shrimp in Country G for less than production cost
We don’t care what will happen to Country F’s shrimp producers. We care if they’re actually dumping or not.
E
shrimp producers from Country F are selling shrimp in Country G for considerably less than production cost or just slightly less
It doesn’t matter whether shrimp producers are significantly under production cost or slightly under production cost. Being under production cost at all constitutes dumping if the product is sold in a different country.

6 comments

One thousand people in Denmark were questioned about their views on banning cigarette advertising. The sample comprised adults who are representative of the general population, and who, ten years previously, had been questioned on the same issue. Interestingly, their opinions changed little. Results show that 31 percent are in favor of such a ban, 24 percent are against it, 38 percent are in favor, but only for certain media, and 7 percent have no opinion.

Summary
A study in Denmark examined people’s views on banning cigarette advertising. The sample was asked similar questions ten years ago, and their answers did not change much. 31% were in favor of the ban, 24% were against it, 38% were in favor, but only for certain types of media, and 7% had no opinion.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
Most of Denmark’s population supports some form of a ban on cigarette advertising.

A
People’s opinions never change very much.
This is too strong to support. The stimulus only says that people’s views on this issue did not change very much, not that people’s opinions *never* change on everything else.
B
A minority of Denmark’s population feels that banning cigarette advertising would set a bad precedent.
There is no support for *why* the people who oppose the ban. They might just really enjoy cigarette advertisements.
C
Most of Denmark’s population is not seriously concerned about cigarette advertising.
There is information about the percentage of people who are “seriously concerned.” Also, most of the respondents were in favor of some form of ban.
D
Most of Denmark’s population favors some sort of ban on cigarette advertising.
31% + 38% = 69% (a majority) of the population. Although the 38% have some reservations about the ban’s implementation, they still support some form of the ban.
E
Most of Denmark’s population does not smoke cigarettes.
There is no information about the percentage of Denmark’s population that smokes. You must assume that if you are in favor of a ban, you do not smoke.

63 comments

Social critic: The whole debate over the legal right of rock singers to utter violent lyrics misses the point. Legally, there is very little that may not be said. But not everything that may legally be said, ought to be said. Granted, violence predates the rise in popularity of such music. Yet words also have the power to change the way we see and the way we act.

Summary

The debate over the legal right of rock singers to say violent lyrics misses the point. There is legally very little that cannot be said. Not everything that can legally be said ought to be said. Violence came before the popularity of violent lyrics in music. Words can change how we see and how we act.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

There could be a relationship between violent song lyrics and violent views and actions.

A
If rock music that contains violent lyrics is morally wrong, then it should be illegal.

This is anti-supported because the author states that very little speech is illegal and that there is a difference between things that are legal and things that ought to be said. The author doesn’t advocate making any speech illegal.

B
The law should be changed so that the government is mandated to censor rock music that contains violent lyrics.

This is unsupported because the author does not advocate for a change in laws, and the author draws a distinction between what can be said legally versus what ought to be said.

C
Violent rock song lyrics do not incite violence, they merely reflect the violence in society.

This is anti-supported because the author states that words can influence how we act, meaning the author thinks it is possible for violent lyrics to lead to some violent acts.

D
If rock musicians voluntarily censor their violent lyrics, this may help to reduce violence in society.

This is strongly supported because the author states that words, exemplified by violent lyrics, can affect how people act. This means that choosing not to speak violent lyrics could reduce violent acts.

E
Stopping the production of rock music that contains violent lyrics would eliminate much of the violence within society.

This is unsupported because the author concedes that violent acts predate violent lyrics. While the author thinks there is a connection between words and actions, it is unclear that stopping these lyrics would eliminate “much” violence.


61 comments