Some people believe that advertising is socially pernicious—it changes consumers’ preferences, thereby manipulating people into wanting things they would not otherwise want. However, classes in music and art appreciation change people’s preferences for various forms of art and music, and there is nothing wrong with these classes. Therefore, _______.

Summary
Some people argue that because advertising changes people’s preferences, advertising is socially harmful. The author shows this argument is flawed by pointing out that classes in music and art change people’s preferences, too, but there’s nothing wrong with these classes. The author’s implicit point is that advertising is not necessarily bad simply because it changes people’s preferences.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
Advertising is not necessarily bad simply because it changes people’s preferences.
The fact that something changes people’s preferences does not make the thing wrong.

A
consumers would still want most of the things they want even if they were not advertised
Unsupported. The author acknowledges that it’s possible advertising does change people’s preferences. The point is that it’s not bad simply because it changes people’s preferences.
B
the social perniciousness of advertising is not limited to its effect on people’s preferences
Antisupported. The author’s point is that advertising isn’t necessarily bad simply because it changes people’s preferences. So the author isn’t suggesting that advertising is socially pernicious.
C
the fact that advertising changes consumers’ preferences does not establish that it is bad
Strongly supported. Using an analogy, the author points out that the fact something changes preferences does not automatically make it bad.
D
if advertising changes consumers’ preferences, it generally does so in a positive way
Unsupported. Although the author believes changing consumers’ preferences isn’t necessarily bad, that doesn’t suggest the changes are positive. They may simply be neutral.
E
it is not completely accurate to say that advertising changes people’s preferences
Unsupported. The author drew an analogy to something that does change people’s preferences, but isn’t bad. The author isn’t denying that advertising change’s people’s preferences. He’s saying even if it changes people’s preferences, it’s not necessarily bad.

2 comments

Sharon heard her favorite novelist speak out against a political candidate that Sharon has supported for years. As a result, Sharon’s estimation of the novelist declined but her estimation of the candidate did not change.

Summary
Sharon heard her favorite author criticize a political candidate that she had supported for years. As a result, Sharon’s opinion of the author declined, while her opinion of the candidate remained the same.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
Someone who hears an opinion that counters a long-held belief will doubt the source rather than question their held belief.

A
Artists who speak out on political matters will have influence only among their most dedicated fans.
There is no support for whether an artist’s most dedicated fans will be influenced. The stimulus just says that Sharon was not influenced.
B
A political statement from an artist should be considered only if the artist has established a reputation for being an honest and knowledgeable observer of politics.
There is no justification given for when an artist should give a political statement.
C
Artists should limit their public political statements to issues that are somehow related to the arts.
There is no support for when an artist should or should not give a political statement.
D
Someone who hears testimony that contradicts a long-standing opinion will generally entertain doubts about the source of the testimony rather than the correctness of the opinion.
Sharon’s longstanding support for a political candidate outweighs the opinion of her favorite author. As a result, Sharon’s opinion of the author declines (doubts the testimony of the source) instead of challenging her own beliefs.
E
People are far less likely to renounce an allegiance that they have had for many years than to renounce an allegiance that is new to them.
There is no information about how long Sharon supported her favorite author, so this comparative statement cannot be made.

14 comments

Meteorologist: Heavy downpours are likely to become more frequent if Earth’s atmosphere becomes significantly warmer. A warm atmosphere heats the oceans, leading to faster evaporation, and the resulting water vapor forms rain clouds more quickly. A warmer atmosphere also holds more moisture, resulting in larger clouds. In general, as water vapor in larger clouds condenses, heavier downpours are more likely to result.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that if Earth’s atmosphere becomes significantly warmer, heavy downpours are likely to become more frequent. This is supported by a causal chain. A warm atmosphere leads to faster evaporation, which leads to rain clouds forming more quickly. A warm atmosphere also leads to more moisture in the atmosphere, which makes clouds larger. The larger, more quickly forming rain clouds result in heavier downpours. This is how heavy downpours are more likely if the atmosphere gets warmer.

Identify Argument Part
The referenced text is offered as support for the conclusion. It’s part of the causal chain that shows how a warmer atmosphere can lead to more frequent heavy downpours.

A
It is the only conclusion in the argument.
The referenced text is not a conclusion. It’s a premise offered to support the conclusion.
B
It is the conclusion of the argument as a whole but is not the only explicitly stated conclusion in the argument.
The referenced text is not a conclusion. It’s a premise offered to support the conclusion.
C
It is a statement that the argument is intended to support but is not the conclusion of the argument as a whole.
The referenced text is not supported by any other statement. It’s a premise offered to support the conclusion.
D
It is used to support the only conclusion in the argument.
This accurately describes the role of the referenced text. It is part of the causal chain that is offered to support the conclusion in the first sentence.
E
It provides a causal explanation of the phenomenon described by the conclusion of the argument as a whole, but it is not intended to provide support for that conclusion.
The referenced text does provide support for the conclusion.

54 comments