Maria: In most of the vampire stories I am familiar with, vampires turn only a few of their victims into vampires. The rest are permanently dead.
Speaker 1 Summary
Joe argues that all vampire stories are based on absurd premises. Why are these premises absurd? Because if they were true, vampires would have almost driven their prey (humans) to extinction. Joe supports this by explaining that in vampire stories, all victims of vampires become vampires. Also, vampires are ancient and immortal. These premises imply that vampires would have replaced humans over time, meaning they would have no more prey.
Speaker 2 Summary
Maria doesn’t make an argument, instead just stating that she has encountered vampire stories where most victims of vampires die, and only a few become vampires. This conflicts with Joe’s claim that in vampire stories, all victims become vampires.
Objective
We need to find a disagreement. Joe and Maria disagree about whether all victims of vampires become vampires.
A
Vampires are always depicted in vampire stories as immortal.
Like (B), Joe agrees with this, but Maria never states an opinion. Maria only talks about whether vampires’ victims always become vampires, not about whether vampires are immortal.
B
Vampires are always depicted in vampire stories as having existed since ancient times.
Like (A), Joe agrees with this, but Maria doesn’t take a position. Maria’s focus is on what happens to vampires’ victims, not the traits of vampires themselves.
C
No vampire stories are incoherent.
Joe disagrees with this, but Maria doesn’t express an opinion. Joe concludes that all vampire stories are “absurd,” or in other words, incoherent. Maria doesn’t make any overall claims about vampire stories, just about the single aspect of what happens to victims of vampires.
D
No vampire stories depict the vampire population as being very large.
Neither speaker agrees or disagrees with this claim. Neither Joe nor Maria talks about the vampire population sizes depicted in vampire stories.
E
In all vampire stories, every victim of a vampire becomes a vampire.
Joe agrees with this but Maria disagrees, so this is the point of disagreement. Joe explicitly states this claim as a premise. Maria says that in some vampire stories, not all victims become vampires, which necessitates disagreeing with this claim.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the criminalization of certain kinds of speech is justified, because they are likely to lead directly to serious harm.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s judgment about free speech restrictions: “The criminalization of these forms of speech is justified.”
A
it is legitimate to prohibit some forms of speech on the grounds that they are likely to lead directly to serious harm
This is a paraphrase of the conclusion. The author argues that it is legitimate (justified), to prohibit (criminalize) some forms of speech.
B
a form of speech can be restricted only if it is certain that it would lead directly to serious harm
“Only if” describes a necessary condition for restricting speech. The author never argued that anything was necessary for restricting speech.
C
in all but a few cases, restricting speech eventually leads directly to serious harm
The author never argued that restricting speech usually leads to serious harm.
D
any form of speech may, one way or another, lead directly to serious harm
The author never argued that any form of speech can lead to serious harm.
E
all but one of several possible reasons for restricting freedom of speech are unjustified
The conclusion isn’t about what reasons for restricting speech are unjustified. Rather, the conclusion is that certain restrictions are justified.