Self-study
Columnist: A recent study suggests that living with a parrot increases one's risk of lung cancer. ███ ██ ███ ██████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██████ █████████ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ███████ ██ ████ ████████ ███████ ██ ██ ███ ████ ██████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ███ ████ █████████ ███████ █████ ██ ███████ █████ ████ █████ ████████████ ███████████ ██ ████████████
Summary
The columnist concludes that the government shouldn’t tax certain hunting and recreational items just because they have associated risks.
Notable Valid Inferences
This is a MBT Except question. For this question, all the wrong answers will be consistent with the conclusion that the government shouldn’t tax certain recreational items just because they’re dangerous. The right answer will conflict with this conclusion by offering information that suggests the government should tax certain recreational items just because they’re dangerous.
19.
Each of the following principles ██ █████████ ██████████ ████ ███ ███████████ ██████████ ███████
a
The government should ████ █████████ ██ ██████ ████████████ ██████ █████████ ███ ████████████ █████
This is logically consistent with the conclusion. It does not conflict with the conclusion that certain recreational items shouldn’t be taxed just because they’re dangerous. Instead, it proposes that certain items should be taxed to fund education.
b
The government should ███ ███ █████ ███ █████ █████████ ██████████ ███ █████ ███████ ███████████
This is logically consistent with the conclusion. It does not conflict with the conclusion that certain recreational items shouldn’t be taxed just because they’re dangerous. Instead, it argues that people with healthy lifestyles should not be taxed.
c
The government should ██████ █████████ █████████████ ██ █████ █████████████ ██ ██████████ ██ █████ ██████████
This conflicts with the conclusion by suggesting the complete opposite of what the columnist argues. (C) says the government should create financial disincentives for dangerous activities, while the columnist says the government should not.
d
The government should ███ ██████ █████████ █████████████ ███ ██████ ██ ████ ████ ██ █████ ██████████ ████ ██████ █████ ███ █████████ ███████████
This is logically consistent with the conclusion. It supports the conclusion by offering a supporting principle: the government should not create financial disincentives for dangerous activities.
e
The government would ██ █████████ ██ ███████ █████ ██ ███████ ████ ███ ███████ ███ █████ ███ ██████ ██████ ██ ███ ███ █████
This is logically consistent with the conclusion. It does not conflict with the conclusion that certain recreational items shouldn’t be taxed just because they’re dangerous.