Passage A
P1
Low: art subsidy
High: to justify arts subsidies -> public interest must be served. why does art need to be funded by tax?
P2
Low: it is justifiable
High: it's justifiable bc if funding depended on the private sector alone, access to the arts will not be equitably distributed.
P3
Low: social capital
High: participating in the arts creates social capital which is important and good.
MP: public subsidy of the arts is justifiable bc 1) grants more equitable access to the arts and 2) creates social capital
Passage B
P1
Low: necessary conditions
High: for public art subsidies to be justified they must show 1) direct benefit and 2) enable more people to enjoy art that is better than privately funded art.
P2
Low: unpopular
High: even if art does improve, people will not greatly benefit bc they are not interested.
P3
Low: not justified
High: art subsidies are not justified bc people should not be forced to pay (via taxes) for aesthetic enjoyments they don't necessary desire.
MP: art subsidies are not justified bc 1) unpopular, little direct benefit and 2) not very democratic
P1
Low: new evidence
High: traditionally, the exceptionally well-preserved fossils found in the UT desert has been attributed to sudden sandstorms that buried animals whole, preventing scavengers or the elements from damaging the corpses. however, new evidence suggest this hypo might be wrong.
Structure: thesis (new challenges old)
Pre: new evidence + new hypo
P2
Low: sandstones
High: there are three types of sandstones at the UT desert. The first two can be created by wind but do not contain any skeletal fossils. the third one, which has pebbles too large to be moved by wind, contains all the skeletal fossils of the desert.
Structure: new evidence
Pre: new hypo
P3
Low: hypo
High: avalanche caused by heavy rain could explain how animals got trapped in the third type of sandstones.
Structure: new hypo
Pre: more support?
P4
Low: implication
High: modern sand dunes have been observed to suffer avalanches during heavy rain - wet sand becomes mud, which prevents drainage and eventually slides down. however, for this only applies to stand dunes that have been stabilized by vegetation. thus, if the dinosaurs were trapped by this sort of avalanche of sand, the UT dessert must have had plantation and rain during that time.
Structure: implication
MP: new evidence suggests that the pristine condition of fossils found in the UT desert may be caused by "mud slides" instead of sandstorms. this new hypo also suggests that the UT desert may have had vegetation and rain during the period in question.
Views: author
Attitude: open-minded, implicitly supports new hypo
Purpose: to tell us about a hypo and its implication
Structure: thesis (new evidence challenges old theory) -> new evidence -> new hypo -> implication
P1
Low: traditional law
High: under traditional bankruptcy law, debtors have to make their assets available to creditors without the chance to reorganize. Jackson supports this view and believes it is fair and efficient.
Structure: old view
Pre: new view
P2
Low: Korobkin
High: Korobkin attacks Jackson's view and argues that his method overlooks other parties involved, such as the community at large. rAllowing companies to reorganize can lead to more productivity, jobs, wealth, and tax.
Structure: anti-old view
Pre: new view
P3
Low: new law
High: Korobkin believes all involved parties, whether contractually obligated or not, can be fairly treated in a new system that rests on two principles: 1) principle of inclusion - all significantly involved parties should have a say, and 2) principle of rational planning - plan for the LT (reorganization) and prioritize those with the greatest financial damages.
Structure: Korobkin's view (new view)
Pre: author's view
P4
Low: author's concerns
High: the author concedes that while K's system is more equitable than Jackson's, it has flaws. 1) caring about other stakeholders will increase the risk of creditors, leading to higher interest rates, which is bad for the economy, 2) K does not provide a framework for quantifying the factors used to determine which party should be prioritized.
Structure: author's view
MP: while K's new system is more equitable than J's old system, it is not without flaws.
Views: author, K, J
Attitude: qualified critique of K
Purpose: to tell us about a new view and what the author thinks about it
Structure: old view -> old view weakness (by K) -> new view -> new view weakens (by author)
P1
Low: eroding genetic base
High: there is a serious threat: eroding genetic base of crops, which makes crops susceptible to pests and diseases. A possible solution is to conserve the wealth of genetic info contained in heirloom crops cultivated by indigenous Americans.
Structure: issue -> potential solution
Pre: support for solution
P2
Low: heirloom crops
High: heirloom crops which have been selectively bred by indigenous farmers can resists certain pests and diseases as well as thrive in particular environments.
Structure: support (shows why heirloom crops are promising)
Pre: more support
P3
Low: knowledge and tradition
High: indigenous farmers passed down the knowledge and seeds through family and oral traditions (community). due to the lures of market economy, the number of such farmers are dwindling. author says immediate steps must be taken to preserve heirloom crops and their knowledge systems.
Structure: author's opinion/implication
MP: heirloom crops cultivated by indigenous farmers may be a potential solution to the currently eroding genetic base of crops and we must act quickly.
Views: author
Attitude: concerned, optimistic
Purpose: to explain a potential solution and urge immediate actions
Structure: issue + solution -> support for solution -> implication
Passage A
P1
Low: markets
High: markets are amazingly efficient bc they based on collective wisdom and people real financial stakes in them.
P2
Low: better than polls
High: an example of a market hat outperformed polls
P3
Low: efficiency
High: the market is highly efficient at disseminating information
MP: markets are efficient and accurate
Passage B
P1
Low: markets aren't perfect
P2
Low: example
High: prediction suddenly changed after a long time - why?
P3
Low: odds
High: because the market is like a racetrack. people move with the odds.
P4
Low: nothing special
High: markets are not special, they just reflect the majority opinion. they are not necessary more accurate than polls.
MP: markets aren't that amazing
P1
Low: software IP
High: while many believe copyright law is effective at protecting software innovations, some argue that patent protections are also necessary.
Structure: OPA
Pre: author's view
P2
Low: OPA vs author
High: OP argues that algorithm = designed, which is patentable. however, the author contends that since algorithms represent generic principles, they should not be patented.
Structure: author refutes OPA
Pre: author's view
P3
Low: copyright law alone is sufficient
High: copyright law protects the expression, whereas patents protect the design. Since software programs are expression of ideas based on texts (lines of code), they are more appropriately protected by copyright law, which is sufficient. Patents would be overkill. It makes more sense to simply modify the current copyright law.
Structure: author's view
MP: software programs need not be patented since they are adequately and more appropriately protected by copyright law.
Views: author vs OP
Attitude: critical of OP, persuasive
Purpose: to refute OPA
Structure: OPA -> author refutes OPA -> author's conclusion
P1
Low: species classification - two views
High: lumpers: different species do not interbreed. splitters: should be group based on patterns of genetic descent/ancestry.
Structure: two views (context)
Pre: which will prevail? which will the author agree with?
P2
Low: Sibley - splitter
High: Sibley, a splitter, used DNA DNA method to determine that a few species had been misclassified.
Structure: support for splitter
Pre: more support for splitter?
P3
Low: arbitrary
High: critics of Sibley's DNA DNA method argue that his interpretation of the data is arbitrary and Sibley does not deny this.
Structure: qualification
Pre: author's view
P4
Low: implication
High: the author brings our attention back to the fact that this debate will have political and economic implications. e.g. more species = more species that need protection.
Structure: implication (author's view)
MP: there are two opposing views on species classification, a debate which has political and economic implications.
Views: lumpers vs splitters, author (neutral)
Attitude: descriptive, neutral
Purpose: to tell us about a scientific controversy and its potential implications
Structure: context (lumpers vs splitters) -> support for splitters -> support is qualified -> implication
P1
Low: Motown Records
High: the success of Motown records can be attributed to Gordy's entrepreneurial skills and the artistic situation in Detroit.
Structure: thesis (MP)
Pre: support
P2
Low: business strategy
High: as an independent company, Motown was able to resist the convention and focus on creating albums targeted toward a wider audience and on technical quality.
Structure: support (business skills)
Pre: support (artistic environment)
P3
Low: talent pool
High: the successful music programs at Detroit schools enabled MR access to a large pool of talented musicians with diverse skills.
Structure: support (Detroit was artistically developed)
Pre: implication
P4
Low: electric instruments
High: AA musicians were the first to use electric instruments, which created a revolution in popular music that benefited MR.
Structure: support (another factor contributing to MR's success)
MP: MR owes its success to good business strategy and Detroit's favorable music community/culture
Views: author
Attitude: admires MR and Gordy, descriptive
Purpose: to tell us about how and why a record label succeeded
Structure: MP -> support -> support -> support
Passage A
P1
Low: selective prosecution
High: the author will explain why selective prosecution can effectively nullify the law
P2
Low: discretionary non-enforcement
High: the law is overinclusive and it would inflict huge social costs to enforce laws as written. discretionary non-enforcement is one way to mitigate this. we can catch all that violate a law but only enforce on the ones that the law was intended to address.
P3
Low: capricious enforcement
High: this does not mean government agencies will can do whatever they want. they are still bound by legislative intents and what not.
MP: discretionary non-enforcement is an effective tool for mitigating the effects of over-inclusive laws.
Passage B
P1
Low: overdue bills
High: a city with lots of overdue water bills plans to make an example of privileged residents by selectively cutting their water off.
P2
Low: why not liens?
High: why not just place liens on the properties?
P3
Low: loophole
High: can't place liens bc the law prohibits non-tax items from being subjected to liens. why don't we change the law instead of shutting off people's water?
MP: it would be easier to change the law to allow overdue water bills to be subjected to liens than to selectively cut off water
P1
Low: contradiction
High: Warsh's book describes a contradiction in Adam Smith's theories of the Pin Factory and the Invisible Hand.
Structure: MP
Pre: more about the theories
P2
Low: Adam Smith
High: each theory is explained .1) economies of scale: larger operation allows for more specialization, which leads to great productivity and lower costs. 2) in a competitive market, the price is optimal/reasonable.
Structure: context
Pre: how do they contradict each other?
P3
Low: diminishing returns
High: the inherent contradiction: economies of scale with increasing return will eventually lead to monopoly, which undermines competition (the invisible hand). To reconcile the two principles, we must assume that economies of scale has diminishing returns as opposed to increasing returns.
Structure: support + author's view
Pre: support for author's view about diminishing returns
P4
Low: mathematical rigor
High: indeed, economics of diminishing returns came to be preferred to the pin factory (increasing returns.) this is partly due to the fact that the model for diminishing returns was more readily demonstrable via mathematics - economics sought scientific rigor.
Structure: support (why diminishing return became mainstream)
Pre: implication
P5
Low: revival
High: however, increasing returns characterize many industries like railroad. economists were finally able to model increasing returns with sufficient mathematical rigor in the 1970s, which brought the theory back to the mainstream.
Structure: plot twist! (author seems more neutral now)
MP: Warsh's book described a contradiction in Adam Smith's book, which has been somewhat vindicated.
Views: author (telling us about Warsh's views), old view, new view
Attitude: descriptive, neutral
Purpose: to describe a contradiction and later developments
Structure: MP (there is a contradiction) -> context (about each theory) -> support (the points of contradiction) -> support (why people favor the contradiction) -> support (people may no longer favor the contradiction in light of more recent discoveries)
P1
Low: secondary chemicals
High: secondary chemicals/substances found in plants are what give them their distinct smells and tastes.
Structure: context
Pre: how secondary chemicals = smells/tastes
P2
Low: insects
High: insects played a major role via natural selection in the development of secondary chemicals in plants. 1) secondary substances that attracted pollinating insects thrived, and 2) secondary substances that repelled harmful insects thrived.
Structure: MP (insects were important to the development of secondary substances)
Pre: more support?
P3
Low: insects reaction
High: to survive, insects developed ways to cope with the defensive mechanism of plants, which led to their ability to distinguish plants by smell or taste.
Structure: support
MP: insects played a major role in the development of secondary chemicals in plants. these substances are responsible for plants' smells or tastes.
Views: author
Attitude: descriptive, academic
Purpose: to tell us about the development of secondary substances in plants and its casuse
Structure: context -> MP -> support
Passage A
P1
Low: comedians
High: copyright law does not provide a cost-effective way for comedians to protect their material.
P2
Low: paradox
High: common sense holds that low protect = low incentive = few material created. however, this is not the case. why?
P3
Low: social norms
High: social norms substitute for IP law and protects comedians' material
MP: when copyright law fails, social norms substitute for IP law and protects comedians' material
Passage B
P1
Low: social norms > law
High: social norms offer better protection of chefs' recipes than IP law or trade secrecy law
P2
Low: three norms
High: three norms each with a legal parallel
MP: since it is difficult to use IP/trade secrecy law to protect recipes, chefs rely on social norms instead.
P1
Low: debate
High: two views of social darwinism: 1) it is futile to mess with survival of the fittest, and 2) evolution of human society can emerge via collective action
Structure: two views
Pre: debate? or this passage may focus on Gilman's achievements
P2
Low: Gilman
High: Gilman identifies with the second view and believes we have an ethical responsibility to do work that are societally relevant and that makes the best use of our talents.
Structure: Gilman's view
Pre: author's view?
P3
Low: application
High: Gilman urges women to abandon gender-specific roles and hierchy and to reorganize society. she also promotes the female qualities of cooperation and nurturance.
Structure: Gilman's view
MP: Gilman believed that humans can alter/evolve society by 1) allocating work based on merits and 2) abandoning gender roles and promoting female qualities.
Views: Gilman vs 1) view
Attitude: author is descriptive, neutral
Purpose: to tell us about a novelist/social activist's view
Structure: context -> Gilman's view -> Gilman's view
P1
Low: hero
High: hollywood heros usually survive even though they easily could have died had things been slightly different.
Structure: phenomenon
Pre: discussion about movies in which the hero does not survive?
P2
Low: life
High: similarly, the fact that life exists in our universe is extremely lucky or an unlikely event. to allow life, the laws governing the universe must be so finely tuned that the very possibility of life seems improbable.
Structure: argument by analogy -> new phenomenon
Pre: how do we explain this?
P3
Low: multiverse
High: some account for the unlikely existence of life using the multiverse theory. Since there are so many universes, it becomes not unlikely that at least one universe would have the right laws/conditions that support life.
Structure: explanation
Pre: what does the author think?
P4
Low: rules
High: but are the rules really that fined tunes? aka is it really that difficult to have a set of laws that allow life?
Structure: author's question
Pre: answer (maybe the set of rules that allow life are broader/more forgiving than we think)
P5
Low: testing rules
High: instead of changing one rule at a time, the author changed multiple rules and was able to discover very different sets of rules that would allow life.
Structure: author's research (MP)
Pre: the sets of laws that allow life are not as narrow as we think?
P6
Low: multiverse still stands
High: but this new discover does not dispute the multiverse theory which still has its merits.
Structure: implication
MP: the sets of laws that allow life in our universe are not as narrow as we think
Views: author vs conventional researchers
Attitude: curiously, qualified advocacy for her own research
Purpose: to provide some explanations to a question
Structure: context (used for analogy) -> phenomenon (argument by analogy) -> explanation 1 (OPA) -> rhetorical question -> author's answer to question (MP) -> implications (OPA is not necessarily wrong)
P1
Low: Chinatown Chinese
High: linguists believe a new Chinese dialect has evolved in the US and that 1) new immigrants cannot understand this new dialect and 2) Chinese Americans can communicate via this new dialect regardless of what which traditional dialect they speak.
Structure: OPA (linguists's argument)
Pre: author's view (this new dialect sounds too good to be true. author will probably debunk it)
P2
Low: language barrier
High: the supposed language barrier does not exist. "Chinatown Chinese" simply consists of local terminologies, e.g. location names, that new comers don't understand. People can still communicate around this since the cores of the dialects remain intact.
Structure: author disputes 1)
Pre: author disputes 2)?
P3
Low: oversimplification
High: furthermore, sharing a common set of vocabularies pertaining to locations do not constitute a unifying dialect. these vocabs only make up a small portion of all the words used.
Structure: author disputes 2)
MP: linguists are wrong about theirs claims about the properties of a new US Chinese dialect
Views: author vs linguists
Attitude: critical, skeptical of OPA
Purpose: to dispute a view
Structure: OPA -> author disputes OPA -> author further disputes OPA
P1
Low: corrido
High: corrido, a form of narrative folk song, has generic elements and follows familiar conventions that affirms the cohesiveness of Border communities.
Structure: MP
Pre: support
P2
Low: metaphors
High: corridos are simple and rarely feature metaphors, and when they do, the metaphors are simple and readily recognizable such as "thunderstorm." this cohesiveness further demonstrates how the corridor serves to foster the continuity of Border traditions.
Structure: support
Pre: more support
P3
Low: despidida
High: corrido's closing verse, the despidida, has ready-made lines and uniform conventions. very generic.
Structure: support
MP: the corrido's generic theme, structure, and other features serves to preserve the continuity of Border community traditions.
Views: author
Attitude: descriptive
Purpose: to tell us about the features and effects of type of narrative fold song
Structure: MP -> support -> support
A
P1
Low: anti-judicial candor
High: some argue that judges do not need to believe their opinion bc there are institutional considerations.
P2
Low: prudential defense
High: one defense of judicial candor is that the prudential outcomes (guidance to lower court, strengthening of institutional legitimacy) justifies judicial candor
P3
Low: morality defense
High: but regardless of prudential outcomes, one has a moral duty to speak truthfully, which is the 2nd defense of judicial candor
B
P1
Low: judicial opinion
High: there are reasons to think that judges should believe their opinions
P2
Low: abuse of power
High: prevention of abuse of power -> judicial candor. so if judges don't believe their opinions (not being candid), then we cannot control their abuse of power.
P3
Low: cost benefit analysis
High: general cost benefit analysis shows that judicial candor is preferable
P1
Low: grand theories
High: Freudianism and Marxism are grand theories that attempt to explain a broad range of historical phenomena using a singe explanation - that we are government by universal rules.
Structure: OPA
Pre: author's view
P2
Low: discredited
High: such grand theories have been discredited since by counterexamples and by being linked to injustice. in fact, they possess explanatory limitations.
Structure: OPA weakened
Pre: author's view
P3
Low: opportunity
High: even though the we miss the grand theories because they were so satisfying, this is a good opportunity to contemplate new explanations that account for unique, idiosyncratic events. in the process, we can achieve narrative satisfaction and be freed from viewing history as fully determined.
Structure: author's opinion
MP: the grand theories are flawed and new theories that account for unique events will give us new perspectives
Views: author
Attitude: critical of grand theories for being too restrictive but appreciates its appeal
Purpose: to tell us about the fall of grand theories and what may come next
Structure: OPA (grand theories) -> their fall -> opportunity (what comes next)
P1
Low: resurgence
High: there has been a resurgence in native language studies by academics and native American communities at large.
Structure: context
Pre: author supports the movement + what is the best way to revive native languages?
P2
Low: radio stations
High: native language radio stations are particularly effective because of strong oral traditions and community cooperation.
Structure: one way of reviving native language
Pre: other ways
P3
Low: internet
High: the internet threatens native language because it is largely in English. Radio stations need to resonate with oral traditions to combat the threat of the internet.
Structure: obstacle + solution
Pre: solution in detail/ how to resonate with the oral tradition?
P4
Low: effective
High: effective programming should be more than rigid lessons devoid of cultural links.
Structure: solution
MP: native language radio stations can better revive native languages by appealing to their oral traditions (e.g. traditional songs, speeches, recordings of elders speaking)
Views: author
Attitude: persuasive, supports the movement
Purpose: to tell us about a movement and one way to make it more effective
Structure: context (revival of native language) -> radio helps -> obstacle -> how to make radio more effective
P1
Low: pros and cons
High: to make good policies concerning forests, policy makers must have a good understanding of the pros and cons of using forests for economic gains. two common claims that should be considered are 1) forests generate oxygen and 2) they preserve biodiversity.
Structure: thesis
Pre: 1) and 2)
P2
Low: oxygen myth
High: when trees decompose they actually consume as much oxygen as they have released, resulting in zero net oxygen increase.
Structure: 1) not valid
Pre: 2)
P3
Low: biodiversity
High: biodiversity can benefit scientific research and medicine. more importantly, we have a moral obligation to preserve biodiversity (author's view)
Structure: author supports 2) (against economic use of forests)
Pre: more about moral obligation?
P4
Low: misinformation
High: statistics revealed that tropical deforestation has been exaggerated. furthermore, commercial forests, although low in diversity, take the pressure off of natural forests and only make up 3 percent of the world's forest.
Structure: support (pro economic use of forests)
MP: policy makers should have a good understanding of the pros and cons of the economic use of forests
Views: author
Attitude: descriptive but neutral about whether economic use of forests is ultimately good or bad.
Purpose: to present the pros and cons of using forests for economic gains
Structure: thesis -> support (con rejected) -> support (con) -> support (pro)
Passage A
P1
Low: objections to independent research
High: judges object to independent research bc it distorts the adversarial system and judges lack the means to conduct such research.
P2
Low: pro IR
High: IR can help judges make better decisions in cases involving expert witness in science.
P3
Low: trial structure
High: the trial provides a structure of IR, which should supplement, not replace, existing evidence.
MP: the benefits of IR outweighs the costs to the adversarial system
Views: author vs some judges
Attitude: advocating for IR
Purpose: to advocate for IR
Passage B
P1
Low: independent research
High: appellate courts should not conduct IR
P2
Low: cross-examination
High: cross-examination only exists at the trial level
P3
Low: no first-time resources
High: first-time resources cannot be put to cross-examination and therefore doing so would usurp the the trial court's fact-finding function.
P4
Low: court of review
High: when appellate courts conduct independent research, they ignore their role as a court of review.
MP: appellate courts should not conduct IR
Views: author
Attitude: disapproves of IR at the appellate level
Purpose: to voice arguments against IR
P1
Low: dowsing
High: dowsing and how it works (doesn't seem very scientific)
Structure: context
Pre: not sure
P2
Low: opponents
High: opponents of dowsing argue that dowsers subconsciously move their equipment the way they want + some other criticism.
Structure: opposing argument
Pre: author's view
P3
Low: proponents
High: proponents defends dowsing by pointing out that the studies are generally based on bad samples and that dowsers have higher success rate at locating groundwater than geologists or hydrologists using scientific equipments.
Structure: proponents view
Pre: author's view
P4
Low: partial support
High: a recent, extensive study supports two claims by the proponents: 1) dowsers > scientists and 2) they can detect variations in subsurface conditions
Structure: support for proponents' claims
MP: people disagree about the effectiveness of dowsing but recent study suggests that claims by some proponents are true.
Views: opponents vs proponents
Attitude: author is neutral and descriptive
Purpose: to show us two sides of a debate and a new study that partially supports the proponents
Structure: context -> opponents -> proponents -> partial support for proponents
P1
Low: new theory
High: old theory/common sense suggests that we directly know our thoughts and they are non-inferential and infallible. However, based on a new research on young children, some psychologists believe that we in fact do not know our thoughts directly.
Structure: common sense vs new theory
Pre: support + author's verdict
P2
Low: mechanism
High: the mechanism of the new theory is explained: we are such experts in making inferences about our thoughts that we can do it incredibly fast, creating the illusion that we are directly reading our thoughts.
Structure: support
Pre: author's opinion
P3
Low: internal elements
High: the author qualifies the new theory (tacit approval). The theory also suggests that we base our inferences on internal elements, such as emotions and sensations. Since other people do not have access to our internal sensations, it creates the illusion that we always make the right inferences.
Structure: support
MP: based on new research, some believe that we cannot directly know our thoughts.
Views: new theory vs old
Attitude: descriptive, tacitly endorses new theory in P3
Purpose: to tell us about a new theory
Structure: new theory -> support -> support + author's stance
P1
Low: uncertainty
High: despite being a universal recognized Jazz master who values the importance of Jazz history, Marsalis was facing an uncertain future, as was Jazz in general.
Structure: thesis/phenomenon
Pre: why? what changed?
P2
Low: record labels
High: Marsalis had no contract with any record companies and many recording labels had stopped cultivating new talents, focusing on reissues of old recordings instead.
Structure: context demonstrating the state jazz was in
Pre: why did this happen
P3
Low: M's blame
High: M can be blamed for this trend due his unbending classicalism and codification of jazz.
Structure: explanation/support (M was partially to be blamed)
Pre: further explanation
P4
Low: mixed interpretations
High: although M did not intend to "revive" traditional jazz and instead encouraged younger artists to recombine and reinvent traditional elements, studio executives concluded that it would be better just reissue old records instead of investing in new artists.
Structure: explanation
Pre: implication
P5
Low: profit
High: after all, the economics of reissuing old albums already paid for was too attractive.
Structure: explanation/implication
MP: M's emphasis on tradition was partially responsible for "inspiring" record labels to stop investing in new artists and focus on reissued.
Views: author
Attitude: descriptive, explanatory, admires M as a jazz master and defends him a little
Purpose: to describe the state of jazz and what led to it
Structure: phenomenon -> context -> expo -> expo -> implication
My Mac Mini M1 with 8gb of RAM failed the ProctorU equipment test 2/3 times because my RAM usage exceeded 95% capacity even though I had no other applications open. This seems like an issue with ProctorU's software, as the M1 chip should be powerful enough to handle the test. Does anyone know how to fix this? I recommend you test your equipment if you also plan to use a M1 Mac!
Passage A
P1
Low: insider trading
High: it's a crime to trade on info that only you have because of your special position within a company
P2
Low: ordinary stock analysis
High: but ordinary stock analysis is based on gaining knowledge that others don't have. how is insider trading different?
P3
Low: stock market
High: the market benefits from having info reflected ASAP. so insider trading helps the market become more efficient
P4
Low: good for everyone
High: this way the market can more quickly reflect accurate stock prices and this benefits all
P5
Low: insider non-trading
High: but people who decide not to trade based on insider info do not get punished
MP: insider trading is good for the market and benefits everybody
Views: author
Attitude: advocating for making insider trading legal
Purpose: to voice support for insider trading
Passage B
P1
Low: transparency
High: transparency is a basic principle of the stock market. participants should all have the same info at the same time. gains depends on analysis skills.
P2
Low: insider trading is unfair
High: insider trading is unfair and prevents others from making money in the stock market
P3
Low: repercussions
High: loss of investor confidence -> less investment -> companies can't get funding -> broader financial repercussions
MP: insider trading is unfair and can lead to ugly financial/economic repercussions
Views: author
Attitude: critical of insider trading
Purpose: showing why insider trading is bad