A
cites examples that are insufficient to support the generalization that performance evaluations in the professional world are conducted in realistic situations
The strength of the author’s examples is irrelevant. We’re focusing on whether the author’s reasoning for arguing that students should have access to textbooks during exams is sound.
B
fails to consider the possibility that adopting its recommendation will not significantly increase most students’ test scores
The effect the author’s recommendation would have on test scores is irrelevant to whether the reasoning in the author’s argument is sound.
C
neglects to take into account the fact that professionals were once students who also did not have access to textbooks during examinations
We don’t know if the author took this into account, but regardless, the fact that professionals were once students has no bearing on the strength of the author’s argument that students should have access to textbooks during exams.
D
neglects to take into account the fact that, unlike students, professionals have devoted many years of study to one subject
We don’t know if the author took this into account, but regardless, the fact that professionals have devoted years to studying one subject has no bearing on the soundness of the author’s reasoning.
E
fails to consider the possibility that the purposes of evaluation in the professional world and in school situations are quite dissimilar
This describes a possibility that the author ignores. If the purposes of evaluation in the professional world differ from those in school, it may be well-reasoned that students aren’t allowed access to textbooks even though professionals have access to reference materials.
A
The term “self-interest” is allowed to shift in meaning over the course of the argument.
The term “self-interest” is used in the same way at all points in the argument.
B
The argument takes evidence showing merely that its conclusion could be true to constitute evidence showing that the conclusion is in fact true.
This is exactly what the argument does. Just showing that altruistic actions could’ve been done out of self-interest doesn’t prove they were actually done out of self-interest.
C
The argument does not explain what is meant by “reward” and “personal benefit.”
The author doesn’t have to define these terms. He is just arguing that all actions are done out of self-interest.
D
The argument ignores the possibility that what is taken to be necessary for a certain interest to be a motivation actually suffices to show that that interest is a motivation.
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of mistaking a sufficient condition for a necessary condition, which doesn’t occur in this argument. The argument doesn’t rely on conditional reasoning, and no necessary or sufficient conditions are discussed.
E
The argument depends for its appeal only on the emotional content of the example cited.
The argument doesn’t appeal to emotions. It uses an example to illustrate how a seemingly altruistic action can be described in terms of self-interest.
Supervisor: I agree with your overall conclusion, but disagree about one point you make, since the latest closed furnaces are extremely fuel-efficient.
A
The overall conclusion is about a net effect but is based solely on evidence about only some of the factors that contribute to the effect.
The plant manager’s argument is vulnerable to this criticism. Just because adopting the new process would have some costly aspects, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the new process would bring the company no profit.
B
The support for the overall conclusion is the authority of the plant manager rather than any independently verifiable evidence.
The plant manager never cites his authority as support for his conclusion. He cites the costs associated with adopting the new process.
C
The overall conclusion reached merely repeats the evidence offered.
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of circular reasoning. The plant manager doesn’t make this mistake. Instead, the plant manager overlooks the possibility that the financial benefits of the new process could outweigh the cost and bring the company a profit.
D
Evidence that is taken to be only probably true is used as the basis for a claim that something is definitely true.
The author doesn’t cite any probably true evidence. He only cites definitely true facts, but those facts aren’t sufficient to prove his conclusion.
E
Facts that are not directly relevant to the argument are treated as if they supported the overall conclusion.
The fact about the sulfur dioxide output of the plant is the only fact the plant manager mentions that isn’t directly relevant to the overall conclusion of the argument, but that fact isn’t treated as if it supports the overall conclusion.
Summary
Physical education should teach people to pursue healthy lifestyles. But focusing on competitive sports causes most of the less competitive students not to pursue sports. This results in these students not exercising enough to stay healthy.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
noncompetitive activities should be taught in physical education.
A
Physical education should include noncompetitive activities.
This answer is strongly supported. If competitive sports causes non-competitive students not to pursue sports, then physical education should include noncompetitive activities to teach these students to pursue a healthy lifestyle.
B
Competition causes most students to turn away from sports.
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus whether competition causes most students to turn away. We only know that competition causes most non-competitive students to turn away.
C
People who are talented at competitive physical endeavors exercise regularly.
This answer is unsupported. The stimulus doesn’t address the group of students that excel at competitive sports.
D
The mental aspects of exercise are as important as the physical ones.
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know from the stimulus what aspects of exercise are important.
E
Children should be taught the dangers of a sedentary lifestyle.
This answer is unsupported. The stimulus only addresses what physical education should accomplish for students.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why did indigenous Australians and indigenous Tasmanians develop such different cultures and technologies within 2,000 years of being separated?
Objective
The correct answer must fail to explain why indigenous Australians developed technologies that indigenous Tasmanians did not. Every wrong answer, meanwhile, will offer a difference between the groups explaining why their cultures and technologies diverged.
A
After the disappearance of the land bridge the indigenous Tasmanians simply abandoned certain practices and technologies that they had originally shared with their Australian relatives.
This is a difference between the groups that explains the technological discrepancy. Both cultures were positioned to make the developments in question, but the indigenous Tasmanians gave up some tools and practices.
B
Devices such as the spear-thrower and the boomerang were developed by the indigenous Tasmanians more than 10,000 years ago.
This deepens the mystery. Indigenous Tasmanians invented these technologies, yet they were absent from Tasmanian society 2,000 years later.
C
Technological innovations such as fishing nets, polished stone tools, and so on, were imported to Australia by Polynesian explorers more recently than 10,000 years ago.
This explains the technological discrepancy. Polynesian explorers are responsible, because they introduced technologies to indigenous Australians but not to indigenous Tasmanians.
D
Indigenous people of Australia developed hunting implements like the boomerang and the spear-thrower after the disappearance of the land bridge.
This contributes to an explanation of the technological discrepancy. Indigenous Australians developed these tools after the land bridge disappeared, so they were not introduced to indigenous Tasmanians.
E
Although the technological and cultural innovations were developed in Australia more than 10,000 years ago, they were developed by groups in northern Australia with whom the indigenous Tasmanians had no contact prior to the disappearance of the land bridge.
This contributes to an explanation of the technological discrepancy. Indigenous Tasmanians were not introduced to the developers of these technologies before the land bridge disappeared.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why did people who received the hepatitis A vaccine exhibit symptoms of hepatitis A?
Objective
A hypothesis resolving this discrepancy must reveal new information about the group who received the vaccine. It should either indicate their infection with hepatitis A prior to inoculation or distinguish between the hepatitis A virus and the symptoms it causes.
A
The placebo did not produce any side effects that resembled any of the symptoms of hepatitis A.
This does not imply that the vaccine did produce such side effects. It refers to placebo recipients only, and does not address the discrepancy, which involves only vaccine recipients.
B
More members of the group that had received the placebo recognized their symptoms as symptoms of hepatitis A than did members of the group that had received the vaccine.
This is irrelevant information. There is no indication that participants self-reported their symptoms, so this difference in attribution between the groups would not have affected the study.
C
The people who received the placebo were in better overall physical condition than were the people who received the vaccine.
This does not explain why people who received the vaccine developed hepatitis A symptoms. The discrepancy is not between the two groups, but between the vaccine's complete effectiveness and the hepatitis A symptoms among the people who received it.
D
The vaccinated people who exhibited symptoms of hepatitis A were infected with the hepatitis A virus before being vaccinated.
This resolves the apparent paradox by explaining that vaccine recipients were infected prior to inoculation. It is consistent because the author gives no information about the vaccine's effect on patients already infected with hepatitis A.
E
Of the people who developed symptoms of hepatitis A, those who received the vaccine recovered more quickly, on average, than those who did not.
This does not explain how vaccine recipients developed symptoms in the first place. If the vaccine is completely effective, patients who received it should not have contracted hepatitis A.