#help #feedback Q22

I felt that E was the most supported answer but I thought it was a trick answer because it calls them "evolutionary theorists" when the passage SPECIFICALLY calls Gilman (and Social Darwinists by extension) "social theorist" in the first sentence of the passage.

In the first sentence of the second paragraph it says she "applied evolutionary theory in the movement for social change" but applying evolutionary theory doesn't make you an evolutionary theorist. For instance, in the context of this passage they seemed to be making a distinction between Darwin (the scientist and evolutionary theorist) and Social Darwinists (the social theorists, using evolutionary theory).

I ended up choosing D because I felt it was supported in P1S2, "Darwin's theory of evolution did not directly apply to social ideology but various intellectuals translated his ideas..." so we could make the (admittedly weak) inference that Gilman was influenced indirectly. I didn't love this answer, and I see why it was wrong, but I felt like it was easier for test makers to argue that Gilman was a social theorist (explicitly stated) not an evolutionary theorist and thereby make answer choice E wrong.

My current "fix" for my reasoning on answer choices is around D's wording being more decisive than the strength of the inference allows, but that doesn't completely resolve my issue because ultimately we're not supposed to make ANY inferences about a subset (evolutionary theorists) that is different from the subset in the passage (social theorists).

What makes one weak inference (that social theorists = evolutionary theorists) better than another (that translated ideas = influenced indirectly)?

I let my personal bias influence me here. I got it down to A and D. I was stuck on the premise that "Most trail users will be dedicated hikers who have great concern for the environment" because that's an unrealistic assumption in real life. Actually the opposite is true. So in that sense, the argument was assuming an attribute of a few users (dedicated hikers) would apply to the majority of trail users.

I wish I hadn't gotten stuck on that because it took my attention away from the real conclusion and real argument structure. Good lesson there.

Ughhhh. I got this wrong for exactly the reason JY stated. I assumed the conclusion went from "the subsequent instructions..." all the way to the end of the sentence.

My question is, how does one avoid this mistake in the future? Is this just a sneaky grammar thing? Does the conclusion include only "the subsequent instructions on Mesmosis videos are extremely effective" because the emdash indicates a parenthetical clause?

Is there a way to make the timing data column bigger? Sometimes it's hard for me to see the details.

This question in particular feels doable without reading passage B because answer C is the only one that can reasonably be argued to be an assumption in the argument of passage A. All the other answers are way off. A and D are about topics not discussed at all. B and E are way too extreme.

I took this PT before I started using 7Sage and this question kicked my ass. It was so out of left field that I was totally thrown off and couldn't parse any of the information.

As for your second question, matching argument pattern is not the same as matching paragraph structure. Just because the premises are out of order doesn't mean the argument pattern is different.

You can rewrite E and have it look exactly like the stim without changing its meaning.

Original: We know that most of the snacks parents buy go to other people's children, because when other people's children come to visit, parents give out more snacks than usual.

Rewritten: Parents give out more snacks when other people's children come to visit than [they do when other people's children are not there. Therefore,] we know that most of the snacks parents buy go to other people's children.

It may help to note that D is comparing actions during a subset (summer) to actions during another subset (winter) and makes a conclusion based on what is true during each subset (varieties of fruit). The stimulus compares actions during a subset (school year) to actions during another subset (out of school) and makes a conclusion about what must be true during the superset (the entire year).

For E, they're comparing actions during a subset (snacks given out while kids are visiting) to what must be true of a superset (all snacks bought at any time). Same as the stim.

My surgery was last year but same. Part titanium now thanks to a severely bulging disk that "could not lead to serious back pain" lmao.

The stimulus says "virtually unchanged" which modifies unchanged to mean there might have been a change but it was so minuscule as to be irrelevant.