Self-study
Support Superconductor development will enable energy to be transported farther with less energy lost in transit. ████ ████ ████████ ███████ ██████████ █████████████ ███ █ ███████ ███████████ ████████ ████ ███ ███ ███████ ███ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ███████ ██████ █████ ████ ██ █████ ████████ ████████ ██████ █ ████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██████ █████ ███ ███████ ███ ███ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ████████ █████████ ███ ███████ ██████ ██ ████ █████
The author concludes that superconductor development, which will enable more efficient energy transport, will improve industrial productivity. As evidence, the author offers an analogous case where oil replaced coal as the primary fossil fuel and decreased shipping costs in the process.
Identify Argument Part
The referenced text is the argument’s main conclusion. The argument uses an analogy to explain how superconductor development will improve industrial productivity.
14.
The claim that superconductor development ████ ████████ ███████ ██████████ ████████████ █████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ █████ ██ ███ █████████
a
It is a ██████████ ███ █████ ███ █████ ████ ████████ █████ ███ ██████ █████ ███ ██████ █ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████ ████████
Shipping costs are partly a function of transit losses, and superconductor development will enable more efficient transit. The author offers the claim about shipping costs as support for the conclusion that superconductor development will improve industrial productivity. It's accurate to say that this claim is "partial support," because there are
b
It is a ██████████████ ███ █████ ███ █████ ████ ██████████████ ███████████ ████ ██████ ██████ ██ ██ ███████████ ███████ ████ ████ ██████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ██ █████████████
This isn’t a generalization. Instead, it’s a specific prediction the author attempts to support through an analogy.
c
It is an ██████████ ██████████ ███ ██████████ ████ ██████████████ ███████████ ████ ██████ ██████ ██ ██ ███████████ ███████ ████ ████ ██████ ████ ██ ████████
The referenced text is a conclusion that’s supported by the premises. The author is trying to convince us that superconductor development will likely improve productivity. If it were the author's assumption, we wouldn't be able to point to it in the argument, because assumptions are implicit.
d
It is a ███████ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ █████ ████ ███ ███ ███████ ███ ████ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ███████ ██████ █████ ████ ██ █████ ████████
The referenced text isn’t a premise. Instead, it’s a conclusion supported by premises, such as the analogy about oil and natural gas in North America.
e
It is cited ██ ████████ ████ ████████ █████ ███ █ ████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██████ █████ ███ ███████ ███ ███ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ████████
The referenced text concludes that superconductor development will improve productivity. It doesn’t support the definition of “shipping costs,” which is what this answer refers to.