PT15.S2.Q8 - Would it be right for the government

Comments

• JuandaSheep Alum Member

  August 2019 42 karma

  Hi there! Not sure what the explanation several years back was, but here's my attempt:

  This is a hard MC question because the conclusion is not directly stated. You see, the argument starts with a two-piece conditional statement, with the sufficient condition disguised as a question (eww):

  The government is right to abandon efforts to determine [insert all that fun stuff] -> it can be reasonably argued that the only acceptable level of toxic in food is zero.

  The stuff after the "however" negates the necessary condition for this statement, which implies that it's not right for the government to abandon the efforts. This "however sentence" is a premise that supports the main conclusion.

  The stuff after the "furthermore" adds additional reasons to support the idea that the government shouldn't stop its efforts in determining...stuff.

  (A) the government should continue trying to determine [insert all that fun stuff] is a paraphrase of my version of the main conclusion. It's what other pieces of this argument are trying to support.

  (D), which is essentially the stuff after "furthermore," offers a reason to support (A). So it's not the main conclusion of this argument.

  Hope this helps!
• JuandaSheep Alum Member

  August 2019 edited August 2019 42 karma

  Oops, posted the same thing twice. #internetproblems