A
Cases in which swimmer’s ear progresses to more serious infections are very rare.
B
Most of those who suspected incorrectly that they had swimmer’s ear also believed that they had other ailments that in fact they did not have.
C
Most of the people who diagnosed themselves correctly had been treated by a physician for a prior occurrence of swimmer’s ear.
D
Physicians who specialize in ear diseases are generally able to provide more accurate diagnoses than those provided by general practitioners.
E
For many people who develop swimmer’s ear, the condition disappears without medical or pharmaceutical intervention.
Parent: I had tried without success to get my young child to brush her teeth. I had hoped that she would imitate me, or that she would be persuaded by reason to brush her teeth. Then, I made a point of brushing her teeth for her immediately before reading her a story before her naps and at night. After several weeks, when I would pick up a storybook at these times, she began automatically to retrieve her toothbrush and brush her teeth herself.
Summary
A parent has tried to get a young child to brush their teeth. The parent hoped that the child would imitate them or that the child could be persuaded to do so, but both of these attempts failed to get the child to brush their teeth. Then, the parent started brushing the child’s teeth immediately before reading the child a nighttime story. After several weeks, whenever the parent picked up a storybook the child began to automatically brush their teeth on their own.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Young children adopt a behavior through habit and repetition.
A
Children are most effectively taught to do something by someone’s setting an example.
We don’t know whether children are most effectively taught through example. In the stimulus, the parent attempted to set an example for the child and the example was ineffective in teaching the child to brush their teeth.
B
Children more readily adopt a behavior through habit and repetition than through other means.
In the stimulus, the child learned to brush their teeth through habit and repetition as opposed to persuasion and an example set by their parent.
C
Children are too young to understand rational arguments for adopting a behavior.
We don’t know whether children do not understand arguments for rationale behavior. In the stimulus the parent states that persuasion did not work, but this could be for reasons other than the child’s lack of understanding.
D
Children often imitate the behavior of others rather than listening to reason.
We don’t know whether children often imitate the behavior of others. In the stimulus, the parent attempted to teach a child to brush their teeth by setting an example and the child failed to adopt the behavior.
E
Children ordinarily act contrary to their parents’ expectations in order to get more attention.
We don’t know whether children act a certain way in order to get more attention. In the stimulus the child did act contrary to the parent’s expectations, but this could be for reasons other than the child seeking more attention.
Raymond Burr played the role of lawyer Perry Mason on television. Burr’s death in 1993 prompted a prominent lawyer to say “Although not a lawyer, Mr. Burr strove for such authenticity that we feel as if we lost one of our own.” This comment from a prestigious attorney provides appalling evidence that, in the face of television, even some legal professionals are losing their ability to distinguish fiction from reality.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that even some legal professionals cannot tell fiction from reality because of television. As evidence, she provides a quote from an attorney following the death of an actor who played a lawyer on TV: “Although not a lawyer, Mr. Burr strove for such authenticity that we feel as if we lost one of our own.”
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author’s reasoning is flawed because her evidence contradicts her conclusion. She concludes that some lawyers can’t tell reality from fiction, but her example shows a lawyer who can. The lawyer she quotes says that the actor felt like “one of our own,” even though the actor was not a lawyer. This shows that the lawyer could in fact tell reality from fiction.
A
takes the views of one lawyer to represent the views of all lawyers
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of “hasty generalization.” But the author concludes that some legal professionals can’t distinguish fiction from reality, not that all legal professionals can’t.
B
criticizes the lawyer rather than the lawyer’s statement
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of “attacking the source,” but the author doesn’t make this mistake. She simply draws a conclusion about the lawyer based on the lawyer’s statement. She isn’t making an unwarranted attack on the lawyer.
C
presumes that the lawyer is qualified to evaluate the performance of an actor
The author never addresses whether the lawyer is qualified to evaluate the actor’s performance. She just argues that the lawyer thinks that the actor was a real lawyer. Whether or not he was a good actor is irrelevant.
D
focuses on a famous actor’s portrayal of a lawyer rather than on the usual way in which lawyers are portrayed on television
“The usual way in which lawyers are portrayed” on TV is irrelevant to the author’s argument. She’s just claiming that one lawyer’s comment about one actor’s portrayal shows that some legal professionals can’t distinguish reality from fiction.
E
ignores the part of the lawyer’s remark that indicates an awareness of the difference between reality and fiction
In his comment about the actor, the lawyer explicitly says, “Although not a lawyer...,” showing that the lawyer can distinguish reality from fiction. The author ignores this when she concludes that, based on this quote, some lawyers cannot distinguish reality from fiction.