Hi, I would appreciate it if someone could explain how "that style of argumentation" in the third sentence refers to "impugning the motives" instead of "taken a partisan stance". I thought "a partisan stance" can be said as a style of argumentation. ...
First impression wise, this argument isn't great because the conclusion is so strongly worded ("_no_ loss in safety"). We can strengthen this argument by showing that having two types of passenger vehicles on the road (one that's lighter and, hence, more ...
Hi, Thank you for your time. Please take a look at the following stimulus:
> All students at Pitcombe College were asked to label themselves conservative, liberal, or middle-of-the-road politically. Of the students, 25 percent labelled ...
Hi, I really struggle to see why (A) doesn't weaken the first sentence in the stimulus "Tenants who do not have to pay their own electricity bills do not have a financial incentive to conserve electricity."
In terms of (E), how do we know that "the biggest decreases in family income" were occurred within the period from 1996 to 2004? Because of this trouble, I picked E under the concept that I can' ...
I still don't understand why "the only" in answer choice B is valid. My original prephrase was "vote for L or N -> unacceptable." B says: unacceptable -> vote for L and N. It seems that B is the exact reversal of my prephrase.
One of the "rules" that I have learned from Ellen Cassidy's loophole and just general LR practice is that we should be extremely weary of answer choices that say we "should" do something. For this specific question, I immediately picked D because it was ...
Not sure how to tag admin and sorry if this is a bit nit-picky but I just noticed that the comparative art passage on PT88 is only labeled as an art passage, not comparative, so it doesn't come up if you sort RC passages for comparatives when making ...
Doesn't answer E attack the premise? Since in the passage it says that extractable known field remains the same and answer choice E says the lands that are unextractable are considered extractable now.
Could a kind 7sager double-check my logic? After reading the argument, I thought it was well-supported. If it is in fact a poor argument, could someone point out why?
And does D weaken the argument because it provides a potential reason why ...
Is this a correlation-causation argument because it assumes that the increase in high school dropouts is the only thing that is causing the increase in recruitment among 18 year olds? And why would the author draw such a conclusion?
When reading the stimulus, I thought that the "population" meant all of the delta green ground beetles. How am I supposed to know that the "population" refers just to the observed number of delta green ground beetles?
I didn't think there was a good answer...
Why is D correct? and what kind of flaw is this?
"Faden presumes, without providing justification, that the evidence for a claim has not been undermined unless that evidence has been proven false"
I think I get it? Non-individuals can buy cars too but what if answer choice e had stated that the proportion of individuals and non-individuals (i.e., corporations etc) purchasing cars were about the same (50/50) Would that make answer choice e incorrect ...
For #2, we can affirm from the first paragraph that MLK was influenced by at least one work from a transcendentalist, namely MLK was influenced by David Thoreau's essay "Civil Disobedience"; the correct answer choice says as much and yet the correct answer ...