The local fair held its annual photography contest and accepted entries from both amateurs and professionals. The contest awarded prizes in each of several categories. As it turned out, most of the prizes in the contest were won by amateurs.

"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why did amateurs win most of the prizes when the contest was open to professional photographers?

Objective
The correct answer will be an unsatisfactory hypothesis, because it will fail to explain why amateurs won most of the prizes. Every wrong answer, meanwhile, will identify a difference between amateur and professional entrants that implies amateur photographers had an advantage.

A
Many more of the entries in the contest were from amateurs than were from professionals.
This would explain why amateurs won a majority of the prizes. If more photographs were entered by amateurs, amateurs as a collective had more chances to win prizes than professionals did.
B
The judges in the contest were amateurs, and amateurs tend to prefer photographs taken by other amateurs.
This would explain the amateurs’ success. If the judges had a preference for amateur photographs, they would be more likely to award prizes to amateur entrants than to professional entrants.
C
Amateurs tend to enter their best photographs while professionals tend to save their best work for their clients.
This would explain why amateurs won more prizes than professionals. If amateurs submitted their best work and professionals did not, the quality of amateur photographs entered may have exceeded the quality of the professional photographs entered.
D
Each category in the contest was restricted to amateurs only or professionals only, and there were more categories open to amateurs.
This would explain why amateurs won a majority of the prizes. If most of the prizes were open only to amateurs, then amateurs were bound to win a majority of them.
E
Three times as many amateurs entered the contest as had entered in any previous year.
This provides no information about the number of amateur entrants relative to the number of professional entrants. It is still possible more professionals entered the contest than amateurs, in which case the outcome remains unexplained.

Comment on this

One can be at home and be in the backyard, that is, not in one’s house at all. One can also be in one’s house but not at home, if one owns the house but rents it out to others, for example. So one’s being at home is not required for one’s being in one’s own house.

Summarize Argument
The author claims that “one’s being at home is not required for one’s being in one’s own house.” To back up this claim, we are offered an example: if you visit a house that you own but rent to someone else, you can be in your house but not at home (because it’s someone else’s home).

Identify Argument Part
The claim that one can be at home without being at one’s house doesn’t actually form part of the argument. Instead, it’s a piece of context that introduces the substance of the argument. Because the conclusion only focuses on being in one’s house without being at home, being at home without being at one’s house is ultimately irrelevant to the conclusion.

A
The claim is required to establish the conclusion.
The claim about being at home without being in your house doesn’t actually support the conclusion at all, because the conclusion is just about being in your house without being at home. That means it can’t be essential for the conclusion.
B
The claim represents the point the conclusion is intended to refute.
The author never states a point that the conclusion is meant to refute; the argument isn’t aimed against anything.
C
The claim is compatible with the truth or falsity of the conclusion.
This accurately describes the claim about being at home without being in your house. True or false, it doesn’t affect the conclusion, which is just about being in your house without being at home. If you removed this claim from the stimulus, it wouldn’t change anything.
D
The claim points out an ambiguity in the phrase “at home.”
The author never claims that the phrase “at home” is ambiguous. The argument is meant to establish an unexpected relationship between being at home and being in your house, which is possible because each of those concepts is clear.
E
The claim inadvertently contradicts the conclusion.
The claim about being at home without being in your house doesn’t contradict the conclusion at all. It’s entirely possible for both statements to be true; neither interferes with the other.

22 comments

News item: The result of a recent public survey has been called into question because one of the pollsters admitted to falsifying data. The survey originally concluded that most people in the country favor investing more money in information technologies. Because falsified data were included in the survey, its conclusion is not true; a majority does not favor more investment in information technologies.

A
the conclusion of the survey would be verified if the falsified data were excluded
This is a key possibility that the news item doesn’t consider. Regardless of the falsified data being included in the survey, it’s still possible that the majority of people in the country favor more investment in information technologies.
B
the conclusion of the survey will be accepted by the public even though falsified data were used
Whether or not the conclusion of the survey will be accepted by the public is irrelevant. We’re only concerned with whether the news item’s conclusion is sound.
C
other pollsters in other surveys also may have falsified data
The actions of pollsters in other surveys have no bearing on whether the recent public survey’s conclusion is true.
D
some people who responded to the survey were lying
We don’t know if the news item failed to consider this, but even if it didn’t, this isn’t a possible reason that the news item’s conclusion, that a majority of people in the country don’t favor more investment in information technologies, is flawed.
E
people’s opinions about investing in information technologies can change as new technologies develop
It doesn’t matter whether people’s opinions can change. We’re concerned with the news item’s argument about the current public opinion on investment in information technologies.

Comment on this

High cholesterol levels are highly correlated with cardiovascular disease. In the Italian town of Limone, however, each of the residents has had high cholesterol levels for many years, and yet they have not developed cardiovascular disease.

"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why are residents of Limone exempt from cardiovascular disease despite their high cholesterol levels?

Objective
A hypothesis explaining this condition must state a key difference between residents of Limone and other people with high cholesterol. That difference must protect Limone residents from cardiovascular disease, either because of a separate health factor or because Limone offers a small sample size.

A
Persons who come from families that have enjoyed great longevity tend not to develop cardiovascular disease.
This is not relevant because it is not stated whether families in Limone have enjoyed great longevity.
B
The stress and pollution found in large cities exacerbate existing cardiovascular disease, but there is little stress or pollution in Limone.
This would explain less severe cardiovascular disease in Limone, but not its total absence. It does not state that cardiovascular disease is caused by stress or pollution, only that those factors exacerbate it.
C
The residents of Limone have normal blood sugar levels, and very low blood sugar levels tend to cancel out the cardiovascular effects of a high cholesterol level.
This cardiovascular impact does not apply to Limone residents, so it cannot explain the absence of cardiovascular disease. Limone residents have normal blood sugar levels, but the effect described occurs only among people with very low blood sugar levels.
D
The residents of Limone inherited from common ancestors a blood protein that prevents vascular blockage, which is a cause of cardiovascular disease.
This difference between Limone residents and people in general can explain the absence of cardiovascular disease in Limone. Since Limone residents have a gene that prevents vascular blockage, they do not suffer from cardiovascular disease.
E
Olive oil is a staple of the diet in some parts of Italy, but unlike butter, olive oil is a monosaturated fat, and monosaturated fats do not contribute to cardiovascular disease.
This does not state that residents in these areas avoid fats like those in butter. It is possible they get similar fats from a different source, or that they consume high amounts of both butter and olive oil.

2 comments

Ramona: One of the primary values of a university education is the intellectual growth that results from exposure to a wide range of ideas. Too many students miss this because they choose technical majors only to improve their chances on the job market. Recent pressures to graduate as quickly as possible only make matters worse.

Martin: But we have to be realistic. My brother graduated last year as an English major, but he’s working as a waiter. Anyway, you are forgetting that even students in technical majors are required to take some liberal arts classes.

Speaker 1 Summary

Ramona asserts three things about university education. First, one of the primary values of it is intellectual growth from exposure to a lot of different ideas. Second, too many students miss out on this growth because they choose technical majors. Third, pressures to graduate quickly encourage students to miss out on intellectual growth.

Speaker 2 Summary

Martin points out that job prospects matter. And, students in technical majors are still required to take some liberal arts classes, which suggests they might still be able to get intellectual growth.

Objective

We’re looking for a point of agreement. This is difficult to anticipate, because neither speaker makes an argument. They seem to agree that there are students who are choosing technical majors. They also agree that the choice of major may have some connection to job prospects.

A
students are stimulated to grow intellectually only in English classes

Neither expresses an opinion about this. Ramona doesn’t specify any particular non-technical major and whether that major alone can stimulate growth. Martin mentions English, but doesn’t indicate only English can stimulate intellectual growth.

B
only graduates with degrees in technical subjects get good jobs

Neither expresses an opinion about this. Ramona believes students choose technical majors to improve their job prospects. This doesn’t mean non-technical majors cannot get good jobs. Martin also doesn’t say anything about whether technical majors are required for good jobs.

C
not every university class exposes students to a wide range of ideas

The speakers agree. Ramona thinks some students in technical majors miss out on a wide range of ideas. Martin points to the fact technical majors must take some liberal arts classes. Thus, they both think some technical classes don’t expose students to a wide range of ideas.

D
intellectual growth is more important than financial security

The speakers arguably disagree. Ramona seems to value intellectual growth above job prospects / financial security. Martin suggest it’s OK for students to value financial security more than intellectual growth.

E
financial security is more important than intellectual growth

The speakers arguably disagree. Ramona seems to value intellectual growth above job prospects / financial security. Martin suggest it’s OK for students to value financial security more than intellectual growth.


11 comments

Mario: The field of cognitive science is not a genuinely autonomous discipline since it addresses issues also addressed by the disciplines of computer science, linguistics, and psychology. A genuinely autonomous discipline has a domain of inquiry all its own.

Lucy: Nonsense. You’ve always acknowledged that philosophy is a genuinely autonomous discipline and that, like most people, you think of philosophy as addressing issues also addressed by the disciplines of linguistics, mathematics, and psychology. A field of study is a genuinely autonomous discipline by virtue of its having a unique methodology rather than by virtue of its addressing issues that no other field of study addresses.

Speaker 1 Summary

Mario says that cognitive science is not a genuinely autonomous discipline. Why not? Because a genuinely autonomous discipline must have a unique domain of inquiry, but the domain of cognitive science overlaps with other disciplines.

Speaker 2 Summary

Lucy disagrees with Mario’s definition of what makes a discipline genuinely autonomous. She claims that a genuinely autonomous discipline is defined by a unique methodology, not a unique domain of inquiry. Lucy supports this with the example of philosophy, which Mario agrees is autonomous despite the fact that its domain overlaps with several other fields.

Objective

We need to find a point of disagreement. Mario and Lucy disagree on what defines a genuinely autonomous discipline. Mario thinks it’s a unique domain, but Lucy thinks it’s a unique methodology.

A
If a field of study that has a unique methodology lacks a domain of inquiry all its own, it can nonetheless be a genuinely autonomous discipline.

Mario disagrees with this, but Lucy agrees. Mario claims that a unique domain of inquiry is a necessary requirement for a genuinely autonomous discipline. Lucy thinks that a unique methodology is necessary but a unique domain is not. This is a point of disagreement.

B
If a field of study is not a genuinely autonomous discipline, it can still have a unique methodology.

Neither speaker mentions the characteristics that any field that is not a genuinely autonomous discipline can or cannot have. We just don’t know.

C
All fields of study that are characterized by a unique methodology and by a domain of inquiry all their own are genuinely autonomous disciplines.

Each speaker proposes one of these only as a necessary condition for a genuinely autonomous discipline. However, we don’t know if either speaker thinks that these conditions, together or apart, are sufficient to make a domain genuinely autonomous.

D
Any field of study that is not a genuinely autonomous discipline lacks both a unique domain of inquiry and a unique methodology.

Neither speaker gives an opinion on this entire statement. To each speaker, lacking one of these conditions is sufficient to make a field not autonomous. However, neither speaker implies that the lack of both conditions is necessary for a field not to be autonomous.

E
Any field of study that is not a genuinely autonomous discipline addresses issues also addressed by disciplines that are genuinely autonomous.

Neither speaker gives an opinion about this. Mario thinks that focusing on unique issues is necessary for a discipline to be genuinely autonomous, but we don’t know if he thinks there are other necessary conditions as well. We know even less about Lucy’s opinion.


9 comments

Jorge: It is obvious that a shift in economic policy is needed, so why not proceed with the necessary changes all at once? If one wants to jump over a chasm, one would do it with one leap.

Christina: I disagree with your view, even though I agree that a shift in economic policy is needed. If one wants to teach a horse to jump fences, one should train it to jump lower heights first.

Speaker 1 Summary
Jorge’s conclusion is express through his rhetorical question - we should proceed with the necessary changes all at once to our economic policy all at once. He supports this conclusion by an analogy to jumping over a chasm, which is something we would do all in one leap.

Speaker 2 Summary
Christina’s conclusion is that we shouldn’t change economic policy all at once. We should proceed with smaller changes over time. This is supported by an analogy to teaching a horse to jump fences. We would train a horse to jump lower heights first and build up to greater heights.

Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree about the pace at which we should change economic policy. Jorge thinks we should do it all at once. Christina thinks we should do it more slowly.

A
a shift in economic policy is not needed
The speakers share the same opinion about this. Both think we need a shift in economic policy.
B
revising current economic policy incrementally is like teaching a horse to jump fences
Jorge doesn’t express an opinion about this. He doesn’t comment on Christina’s horse jumping analogy.
C
the faster current economic policy is revised, the less painful the initial changes will be
Neither expresses an opinion about this. Neither suggests there will be pain from initial changes or that faster revisions means less pain in the beginning.
D
the economic changes should not all be made at the same time
This is a point of disagreement. Jorge thinks economic changes should be made all at the same time. Christina believes they should not be made all at the same time.
E
the current economic situation is grave
The speakers share the same opinion about this (or have no opinion). Both agree that a shift in economic policy is needed. If that means the current situation is grave, then the speakers agree. If we don’t know whether the current situation is grave, then they have no opinion.

Comment on this

Commentator: A political constitution that provides the framework for the laws of a nation must be interpreted to apply to new situations not envisioned by its authors. Although these interpretations express the moral and political beliefs of the interpreters, they are usually portrayed as embodying the intentions of the authors. This fiction is vital because without it the illusion, so necessary for political stability, that laws are the bequest of a long tradition rather than the preferences of contemporary politicians would vanish.

Summary

Constitutions that provide the framework of laws for a nation must be interpreted to apply to new situations that the authors did not envision. These interpretations are portrayed as embodying the intentions of the original authors even though they represent the moral and political beliefs of the interpreters. This portrayal is necessary for political stability. Without the portrayal, laws that exist because of tradition, rather than the wishes of modern politicians, would vanish

Strongly Supported Conclusions

Interpreting a constitution to apply to new situations not envisioned by the framers is vital to political stability and the preservation of laws that exist due to tradition. Some interpretive fictions are vital. If people don’t think the constitution is being interpreted based on the intentions of its authors, political instability will increase.

A
If the people of a nation do not believe that the laws under which they live express the intentions of their political leaders, that nation will become more politically unstable.

This is unsupported because it refers to the intentions of political leaders rather than political leaders interpreting the constitution in line with its authors’ intentions.

B
Political instability will increase if the people of a nation cease to believe that their constitution is being interpreted consistently with the intentions of its authors.

This is strongly supported because the stimulus states that the portrayal of a constitution being interpreted in accordance with its authors’ intentions is necessary for political stability.

C
Political instability will ensue if people come to believe there is a divergence between the beliefs of the authors of their constitution and those of their present political leaders.

This is unsupported because the stimulus doesn’t claim that modern politicians must believe the same thing as the authors of a constitution. It only states that modern politicians must interpret a constitution in accordance with the authors’ intentions.

D
A written constitution preserves the illusion that laws are the bequest of a long tradition rather than the creations of modern politicians.

This is unsupported because a written constitution doesn’t inherently preserve any illusion - it’s how modern politicians interpret the constitution that matters.

E
The perceived lack of a long legal tradition in a nation makes the political stability of that nation dependent upon the fiction that its present political leaders share the intentions of the authors of the constitution of that nation.

This is unsupported because modern politicians don’t have to share the intentions of the constitution’s authors. The stimulus only states that modern politicians must interpret the constitution in a way that aligns with the authors’ intentions.


2 comments

Many people joke about Friday the thirteenth being an unlucky day, but a study showed that in one year approximately 17 percent of people scheduled to fly canceled or did not show up for their flights on Friday the thirteenth—a rate higher than that on any other day and date in that year. This shows that a significant percentage of the population would rather disrupt their travel plans than risk flying on a supposedly unlucky day.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis

The author hypothesizes that a significant proportion of the population are willing to disrupt their plans to avoid flying on an “unlucky” Friday the thirteenth. This hypothesis is based on the observation that during a particular year, more people cancelled or didn’t show up to their flights on Friday the thirteenth than on any other day that year.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes that the reason people didn’t show up for their flights on Friday the thirteenth was the unlucky date, and not some other reason. There aren’t that many Fridays the thirteenth in a single year, so maybe some other significant factor just happened to arise on one or more Fridays the thirteenth that year.

A
People who fly tend to be professionals who as a group are less superstitious than the general public.

Even if people who fly are less superstitious, that doesn’t mean they’re not superstitious—maybe an even higher percentage of the general public would have skipped their flights. This doesn’t provide an alternative explanation, or make the author’s explanation any less likely.

B
Surveys show that less than 5 percent of the population report that they believe that Friday the thirteenth is an unlucky day.

This just doesn’t give us enough context to know how it relates to the 17 percent of people who missed their flights on Friday the thirteenth. Maybe only a very tiny percentage of people fly, and they’re unusually likely to be superstitious—we don’t know.

C
Weather conditions at several major airports were severe on the Fridays that fell on the thirteenth in the year of the study.

This weakens by providing an alternative explanation for why more people missed their flights on Friday the thirteenth. If there happened to be severe weather those days, it makes sense that people would miss their flights even without superstition being involved.

D
In the year of the study, automobile traffic was no lighter on Friday the thirteenth than on other Fridays.

This does not weaken, because the domain of the argument is specific to flights. It would be perfectly reasonable for people to fear flying on an unlucky day but not fear driving, because driving is a much more routine activity.

E
The absentee rate among airline workers was not significantly higher than normal on the Fridays that fell on the thirteenth in the year of the study.

This does not weaken, because there are other factors that explain why airline workers might show up to work on an “unlucky” day. So this doesn’t really contradict the observed data about passengers, and still doesn’t explain the phenomenon.


3 comments