Self-paced
Politician: Homelessness is a serious social problem, but Conclusion further government spending to provide low-income housing is not the cure for homelessness. ███ ████ ███████ ██████ ██ ███ ███████████ ███████ ██ ███ █████ █████████ ██ ██████ ██ ████ ████ █████ ██ ██ ████ ██ ███████ █████ █████████ ██ █████ ██ ███ ████████ █████ ████ ██████ ███ ████████ ███████ ██ █ ████ ██ █████████ ███████ ██ ██████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The politician grants that homelessness is a serious social problem, but argues that the solution to this problem is not further government spending to provide low-income housing. The politician supports this claim by appealing to how even "the most cursory glance" at a newspaper's real estate section shows that there are plenty of available housing units on the market, which (in the politician's view) shows that the belief that people are homeless because of a lack of housing is incorrect.
20.
That homelessness is a serious ██████ ███████ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ █████
a
It suggests an ███████████ ███████████ ██ ███ ███ ███████ ██ ███ █████████
Incorrect. We identified this phrase as a concession, which is not an "alternative point of view." A concession is something the author admits to be true but is not contradictory to their argument.
b
It sets out █ ███████ ███ ████████ ██ ████████ ██ ████████
Incorrect. The "problem" this phrase identifies is homelessness itself. And the argument never provides a resolution to the problem of homelessness. The argument is entirely aimed against one proposed solution for homelessness: spending more on low-income housing. But the argument never provides its own resolution for this problem.
c
It is compatible ██████ ████ █████████ ███ ██████████ ██ ████ ███████ ███
Correct. Remember that a concession is something the author admits is true. Often, what is conceded will be a fact that seems to support someone else's argument or undermine the author's argument, and the author usually proceeds to argue that their argument is valid in spite of how this fact seems at first glance. Almost by definition, then, a concession is a truth that could be consistent either with accepting or rejecting the author's argument. This is especially true in this case, where the concession is a very general claim.
To make this discussion more concrete, think of what this specific statement says: "Homelessness is a serious social problem." Is it possible to agree that this is true and reject the author's conclusion? Yes, because you could think both that homelessness is a serious problem and that the solution is to spend more on low-income housing. Is it possible to agree with this claim and agree with the author's conclusion? Yes, because you could admit (as the author does) that homelessness is a serious problem and yet believe that the solution is not spending more on low-income housing. So even if you didn't identify this phrase exactly as a "concession," hopefully you see how plugging the phrase into this answer choice shows that (C) is descriptively accurate.
d
It summarizes a ████████ ███ ████████ ██ █ █████ ██ ████████ ██████ █████████████
Incorrect. The argument as a whole is aimed at "discrediting" the specific view that the solution to homelessness is increased spending on low-income housing. The argument is not trying to discredit the view that "homelessness is a serious social problem." In fact, the author agrees that homelessness is a serious social problem.
e
It is required ██ █████ ██ █████████ ███ ███████████
Incorrect. Note that we identified this claim as a concession, and not as a premise of this argument. A concession is a claim that might seem to undermine an argument, but doesn't. Almost by definition, then, a concession isn't something "required" to establish a given conclusion. More concretely, you could deny that homelessness is a serious social problem, and still agree with the author that the way to solve homelessness (regardless of how serious a problem it is, or because it's not a problem at all) is not to spend more on low-income housing.