Self-study
Marta: There have been complaints about the lack of recreational areas in our city. ████ ██████ █████ ███████ ███ ███ ███████ ████ ████ ███████ ███████ ███ █████ ███ ██ ████ ██████████ ████ ██ █████ ████ █████
███████ ███ ███ ███ ███████ ████ ██ █████ ███ ███████ ███████ ███ ████████ ████ ████ ███ ████ ████ ██████████ ████████████ ██████ ██ ██████ ███ ███████ ████ ████████ ███ ███████ ██████ ███████ ███████ ██████████████
Objective: Miscellaneous?!?
What kind of question is this? It doesn’t fit cleanly into any of the common question types. But! It’s also a great example of how much critical information question stems often provide. This stem alone tells us:
- We can expect two viewpoints in the stimulus that are in disagreement
- Arthur’s viewpoint will be based on a misinterpretation of Marta’s position
- Our job is to identify the argument Arthur thought Marta was making
So it’s a rare blend of the Disagree and Method of Reasoning question types, but it’s also just its own thing: what does Arthur think Marta is saying?
This prompt calls for heavy anticipation. Unlike causal questions, for example, where there could be a million different alternate causes and trying to anticipate the exact right one is silly, this question turns on one specific misinterpretation. Find it and frame it in your mind before moving to the answers.
Finding The Misinterpretation
Right off the bat, it’s notable that Marta’s claims aren’t structured as an argument – she presents one fact (people want more recreational areas), another fact (some people are pitching turning old railway land into walking trails), and gives her take on the situation (maybe there are better uses for the railway land). She doesn’t give a big THEREFORE WE SHOULD DO THIS.
But Arthur comes in hot with an impassioned defense of the walking trails idea. The land is ideal! This injustice has gone on too long! How dare you throw this idea in the trash without any further thought?!?
Maybe Marta does secretly want to throw the walking trails idea in the trash, but she certainly never said that. All she did was point out an additional consideration. Her stated position is perfectly open to further consideration of the walking trails idea.
So there’s our misinterpretation: Arthur’s criticism suggests that he interpreted Marta to be calling for the immediate trashing of the walking trails idea.
15.
Arthur's criticism suggests that he ███████████ █████ ██ ██
a
maintaining that converting ███ ███ ███████ ████ ████ ███████ ██████ █████ ██ ██ ████████ ████████████ ███ ██ ████ ████
A stimulus where (A) is right would involve Arthur saying “how dare you suggest walking trails have no value at all?!?” The closest he comes to this is his claim that the land is ideal for walking trails, but that's relevant to Marta’s argument without requiring a misinterpretation.
Marta suggests there are more productive ways to use the land, and Arthur says walking trails would be a very productive use of the land. His response addresses her point cleanly, no misinterpretation required.
b
favoring the development ██ ████████████ █████ █████ ████ ███████ ██████
A stimulus where (B) is right would involve Arthur concluding something like “we should not erect pickleball courts without further consideration!”
Arthur’s conclusion centers specifically on the walking trails proposal. Perhaps he does suspect Marta is a secret pickleball advocate, but his argument never compares walking trails to other recreational areas.
c
assuming that the ██████████ ██████████ █ ████████ ██ ████████████ █████ ███ ███ ███████
Arthur’s conclusion is not merely that there's a lack of proper recreational areas, which would be how he’d have responded if he took Marta to be saying (C). His conclusion, rather, is that a particular solution to the problem should not be rejected.
d
recommending that the ████████ ███ ██████████ ███ ███ ███████ ████ ████ ███████ ██████ ██████ ██ ████████ █████████
This matches our anticipation exactly. Arthur’s conclusion is that we shouldn’t throw the walking trails idea in the trash without further thought. But Marta never said we should!
e
asserting that it ███ ███ ██ ████████ ██ ███████ ███ ███ ███████ ████ ████ ████████ ███████ ██████
A stimulus where (E) is right would involve Arthur making a point about how feasible a conversion to walking trails would be: “We could use the old train tracks as signposts! Railroads are already pretty flat and about as wide as a trail!”
That just doesn’t happen.