This page shows a recording of a live class. We're working hard to create our standard, concise explanation videos for the questions in this PrepTest. Thank you for your patience!
This page shows a recording of a live class. We're working hard to create our standard, concise explanation videos for the questions in this PrepTest. Thank you for your patience!
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Evolutionists who believe that a line of Tennyson’s poetry refers to Darwin’s theory of evolution are wrong. How do we know this? Firstly, the poem in question was published nine years before Darwin revealed his theory. This implies that Tennyson probaby didn’t know about Darwin’s theory when he wrote this poem. Secondly, looking at the poem as a whole, the line actually seems to refer to a creationist theory of biology. This gives us a different explanation for the line of poetry, totally independent of Darwin.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is where the author states that the evolutionists are incorrect: “Tennyson’s line of poetry … is misconstrued by many evolutionists as a reference to Darwin’s theory of evolution.”
A
The line of Tennyson’s poetry cannot now be construed as an apt description of Darwin’s theory of evolution.
The author never mentions whether the line of poetry could accurately describe Darwin’s theory. The argument is just concerned with demonstrating that Tennyson did not intend to refer to Darwin’s theory.
B
The dominant biological theory in the early nineteenth century was a creationist theory.
This statement is not supported by the rest of the argument. Instead, it is used to help explain that Tennyson was actually referring to a different theory, thus supporting the main conclusion that Tennyson was not referring to Darwin’s theory.
C
Tennyson’s line of poetry was written well before Darwin had published his theory of evolution.
This statement is not supported by the rest of the argument. Instead, it is used to support the main conclusion that the line of Tennyson’s poetry was not intended as a reference to Darwin’s theory, because Tennyson would not have known about Darwin’s theory.
D
Darwin’s theory of evolution was not the dominant biological theory in the early nineteenth century.
This is not a conclusion drawn by the argument. The author focuses on the relationship (or lack thereof) between a line of poetry and Darwin’s theory, not the overall status of Darwin’s theory during a certain period in history.
E
Tennyson’s line of poetry was not a reference to Darwin’s theory of evolution.
This is a good restatement of the main conclusion. When the author claims that the evolutionists are mistaken about Tennyson’s poem referring to Darwin’s theory, that’s just another way to say that the poem did not refer to Darwin’s theory.
Peterson: Ionic liquids cost many times as much as organic solvents, so they are currently not practical for the chemical industry.
Summarize Argument
Montoya believes that chemical companies should switch from organic solvents to ionic liquids. Peterson disagrees, arguing that ionic liquids are not practical because they cost many times more than organic solvents.
Notable Assumptions
Peterson assumes that the cost of purchasing ionic liquids outweighs the money that the liquid’s benefits could save.
A
The cost of organic solvents is only one of many expenses involved in industrial production of chemicals.
This does not impact the reasoning at all. The fact that it is “one of many” does not cast doubt on how large the price is relative to other expenses.
B
New methods for removing by-products of chemical reactions have recently been developed.
If anything, this weakens Montoya’s argument because it provides less of an incentive to switch to ionic liquids
C
The chemical industry has historically been quick to adopt new techniques that increase the rate at which reactions occur.
This does not impact Peterson’s reasoning. Peterson is primarily focused on the costs outweighing the benefits.
D
Ionic liquids can be reused many times, whereas organic solvents can be used only once.
If ionic liquids can be reused many times, their higher initial cost might be made up, making them more cost-effective in the long run. This directly challenges Peterson’s main conclusion.
E
For the sake of public relations, companies will sometimes use a more environmentally friendly process even if it is slightly more expensive.
This does not impact the reasoning in the argument at all. Why a company chooses to switch to an environmentally sound process is completely unrelated.
This page shows a recording of a live class. We're working hard to create our standard, concise explanation videos for the questions in this PrepTest. Thank you for your patience!
This page shows a recording of a live class. We're working hard to create our standard, concise explanation videos for the questions in this PrepTest. Thank you for your patience!