There is little plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical. Obviously, people must assess one another and not all assessments will be positive. However, there is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental. To be judgmental is not merely to assess someone negatively, but to do so prior to a serious effort at understanding.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author says advice against being judgmental is wise. This is because being judgmental is assessing someone before trying to understand. This argument identifies an exception to a claim. The context highlights claim that people should never criticize others for assessing each other negatively. The authors argument says this is not true in cases where one is being judgmental.

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the principle the author thinks is wise: “there is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental.”

A
To be judgmental is to assess someone negatively prior to making a serious effort at understanding.
This is support for why advice against being judgmental is wise. It shows why being judgmental is wrong.
B
It is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical.
This is the claim provided in the context - to which the author identifies an exception.
C
There is some plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical.
This inaccurately restates the context. The author says there is “little” plausibility, not “some”.
D
Not all assessments people make of one another will be positive.
This is also part of the context. It is a concession point before the author provides an argument.
E
There is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental.
This restates the conclusion verbatim. This is what the author is ultimately arguing - the advice to avoid judging is wise.

27 comments

Even those who believe that the art of each age and culture has its own standards of beauty must admit that some painters are simply superior to others in the execution of their artistic visions. But this superiority must be measured in light of the artist’s purposes, since the high merits, for example, of Jose Rey Toledo’s work and his extraordinary artistic skills are not in doubt, despite the fact that his paintings do not literally resemble what they represent.

Summarize Argument
The superiority of some painters to others in executing their artistic visions should be determined in light of the artists’ purposes. For example, Jose Rey Toledo has definitively extraordinary art even though his art is is not literally representative of its subjects.

Identify Argument Part
This is the claim that the conclusion tells us how to evaluate. The argument takes this as true and tells us how to measure superiority in the execution of their artistic visions: in light of their purposes.

A
It is a hypothesis that the argument attempts to refute.
The argument accepts this claim as true. It says that everyone “must admit” it.
B
It is a generalization, one sort of objection to which the argument illustrates by giving an example.
The argument does not illustrate an objection. It agrees with the claim and argues how to evaluate it.
C
It is a claim that, according to the argument, is to be understood in a manner specified by the conclusion.
The conclusion specifies that this claim should be understood in light of the artist’s purposes.
D
It is a claim that the argument derives from another claim and that it uses to support its conclusion.
This claim is part of the context that sets up the argument about measuring it. It neither gives nor receives support.
E
It is a generalization that the argument uses to justify the relevance of the specific example it cites.
This claim does not justify the relevance of the example, nor is it used as any sort of support. Instead, the example supports how we should measure this claim.

6 comments

Really tough question. Reading only the question stem, it's not clear what type of question it is. Some general "principle" type, I suppose. So, you read the stimulus and then glance at the answers again. Notice there's an argument in the stimulus. Notice the answers are all conditionals. We're looking for a PSA answer choice. We can get away with fudging some ideas because the question stem has the word "most" in it.

So let's lay the argument out.

Sentence 1 zooms into the subset of "Most TV shows". What about them? They depend on advertising funding.
show alive --> funding
contrapositive
/funding --> /show alive (think canceled show)

Sentence 2 tells us a necessary condition of advertising funding.
funding --> many people buy product

Now we get to chain up:
show alive --> funding --> many people buy product

Sentence 3 runs the contrapositive on the whole chain.
/many people buy product --> /funding --> /show alive

[I think we really could have done without sentence 3 since it's not adding anything new. We could have chained up sentences 1 and 2 on our own and also ran the contrapositive on our own. Sentence 3 feels redundant to me.]

Now, sentence 4, the conclusion.
feel show worth preserving --> buy product

All together now:

[P] show alive --> funding --> many people buy product
__________________
[C] feel show worth preserving --> buy product

What's our most standard, cookie cutter formulation of a PSA or SA answer choice that we are trained to anticipate and look for?
IF P, THEN C

With some cleverly crafted referential phrasing, that's precisely what (B) is saying:

IF [a TV show would be canceled unless many people took certain actions], THEN [everyone who feels that the show is worth preserving out to take those actions]. IF [P], THEN [C]

Try to figure it out before reading on.

IF [P], THEN [C]
[P] is [a TV show would be canceled unless many people took certain actions]
[C] is [everyone who feels that the show is worth preserving out to take those actions]

[P] first. "unless" is group 3, negate sufficient. "not a TV show would be canceled --> many people took certain actions" =
"show alive --> many people took certain actions"
What could those actions possibly be referring to? Buy product.
"show alive --> many people buy product"

Now [C]. "everyone" is group 1, sufficient. "feel show worth preserving --> take those actions" Again, what could those actions possibly be referring to? Again, buy product.
"feel show worth preserving --> buy product"

The problem with answer choice (A) is that it's not describing the same shows that the stimulus is describing. The shows in the stimulus depended for their survival on MANY people buying a product. This conforms to our common sense expectations of TV shows. I would expect that the real life TV shows that depend on advertising funding would depend for their survival on MANY people buying whatever products they're meant to be buying.

(A) however talks about a set of TV shows whose survival depends on ONE single person buying a product. "would be canceled unless one took certain actions" What show in the world's survival is dependent on a single person taking some action? I have no idea. But whatever the TV shows (A)'s talking about, they're not the same TV shows that the stimulus talked about.


40 comments

Psychologist: It is well known that becoming angry often induces temporary incidents of high blood pressure. A recent study further showed, however, that people who are easily angered are significantly more likely to have permanently high blood pressure than are people who have more tranquil personalities. Coupled with the long-established fact that those with permanently high blood pressure are especially likely to have heart disease, the recent findings indicate that heart disease can result from psychological factors.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that psychological factors can cause heart disease. This is based on a study showing that people who are easily angered are more likely to have permanently high blood pressure than people with more calm personalities, and the fact that people with permanently high blood pressure are likely to have heart disease.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that the correlation between being easily angered and likelihood of having permanently high blood pressure is due to anger causing the permanently high blood pressure or due to calmness causing lower blood pressure. This overlooks the possibility that high blood pressure could make one easy to anger, or that there’s an alternate cause that leads to both anger and high blood pressure. The author also assumes that high blood pressure causes heart disease.

A
Those who are easily angered are less likely to recover fully from episodes of heart disease than are other people.
This relates to the relationship between anger and recovery from heart disease. But it doesn’t undermine a causal connection between anger and the initial presence of heart disease.
B
Medication designed to control high blood pressure can greatly affect the moods of those who use it.
Without knowing whether many people take this medication, or whether the effect on moods includes making one easily angered, (B) doesn’t do enough to suggest a reversed causal relationship between being easily angered and permanently high blood pressure.
C
People with permanently high blood pressure who have tranquil personalities virtually never develop heart disease.
If anything, this could support the author’s hypothesis by showing that, despite permanently high blood pressure, calm personalities almost never get heart disease. This suggests that psychological factors may have a role to play in causing or inhibiting heart disease..
D
Those who discover that they have heart disease tend to become more easily frustrated by small difficulties.
Becoming more easily frustrated by small difficulties does not constitute being “easily angered.” So, (D) doesn’t suggest that the causal relationship between heart disease and being easily angered is reversed.
E
The physiological factors that cause permanently high blood pressure generally make people quick to anger.
This provides an alternate causal explanation for the correlation between being easily angered and having perm. high blood pressure. If certain bodily factors lead to both, there doesn’t have to be a causal relationship between being easily angered and perm. high blood pressure.

93 comments

A professor of business placed a case-study assignment for her class on her university’s computer network. She later found out that instead of reading the assignment on the computer screen, 50 out of the 70 students printed it out on paper. Thus, it is not the case that books delivered via computer will make printed books obsolete.

Summarize Argument
The availability of online books won't make printed versions unnecessary. This is demonstrated by the fact that in a class, most students chose to print an assignment sheet instead of reading it online, where it was originally made available.

Notable Assumptions
The author makes a conclusion about books from premises about an assignment—in other words, the author assumes that there are enough similarities between books and assignments to draw a conclusion. A good answer choice will help bridge this gap. Additionally, the author assumes that the observed occurrence in an academic setting is generalizable.

A
Several colleagues of the professor have found that, in their non-business courses, several of their students behave similarly in relation to assignments placed on the computer network.
While this answer choice strengthens the evidence, it fails to support the relationship between the premise and conclusion (i.e., the argument). The author makes a jump from a premise about an assignment to a conclusion about books—this doesn’t fill that gap.
B
Studies consistently show that most computer users will print reading material that is more than a few pages in length rather than read it on the computer screen.
This strengthens the argument by substantiating the author’s assumption that students will print out books in addition to assignments. (B) says after a certain length people will print the reading material, strengthening the relationship between the premise and conclusion.
C
Some people get impaired vision from long periods of reading printed matter on computer screens, even if they use high quality computer screens.
This does not affect the argument. The word “some” could mean just one or two people—one person having vision issues due to computer screens doesn’t affect our argument at all.
D
Scanning technology is very poor, causing books delivered via computer to be full of errors unless editors carefully read the scanned versions.
This does not affect the argument. While it may be true that online books would be full of errors if they are not carefully read through, there is no reason for us to believe that they aren’t carefully read through every time.
E
Books on cassette tape have only a small fraction of the sales of printed versions of the same books, though sales of videos of books that have been turned into movies remain strong.
This does not affect the argument. The relative popularity between books on cassette tape and their printed version tells us nothing about the relationship between books delivered via computer and their printed versions.

23 comments

Some twentieth-century art is great art. All great art involves original ideas, and any art that is not influential cannot be great art.

Summary
The stimulus can be diagrammed as follows:

Notable Valid Inferences
Some 20th century art involves original ideas.
Some 20th century art is influential.
Some art that involves original ideas is influential.
If art is great, then it is original and influential.

A
Some influential art involves original ideas.
This must be true. As shown in the diagram, we can infer that some influential art involves original ideas.
B
Some twentieth-century art involves original ideas.
This must be true. As shown in the diagram, we can infer that some twentieth century art involves original ideas.
C
Only art that involves original ideas is influential.
This could be false. (C) can be diagrammed to say influential→ original. This is not a conditional claim given in the stimulus.
D
Only art that is influential and involves original ideas is great art.
This must be true. As shown in the diagram, all great art is influential and original.
E
Some twentieth-century art is influential and involves original ideas.
This must be true. As shown in the diagram, there must be at least some overlap between art involving original ideas and influential art.

9 comments

Aristophanes’ play The Clouds, which was written when the philosopher Socrates was in his mid-forties, portrays Socrates as an atheistic philosopher primarily concerned with issues in natural science. The only other surviving portrayals of Socrates were written after Socrates’ death at age 70. They portrayed Socrates as having a religious dimension and a strong focus on ethical issues.

"Surprising" Phenomenon

Portrayals of Socrates written after his life are markedly different than the one written during his life.

Objective

The right answer will be a hypothesis that explain why the portrayals of Socrates after his life attribute a religious and ethical dimension to his philosophy, whereas the contemporaneous one ascribes him a strictly atheistic, scientific outlook. We’re looking for something that either says the portrayals had different motivations, or that Socrates himself changes after his portrayal in Aristophanes.

A
Aristophanes’ portrayal of Socrates in The Clouds was unflattering, whereas the other portrayals were very flattering.

The portrayals are diametrically opposed. Whether or not they’re flattering doesn’t explain the vast differences in who they say Socrates really is.

B
Socrates’ philosophical views and interests changed sometime after his mid-forties.

Aristophanes portrays Socrates at age 40. If his views changed afterwards, and if those are the views he’s remembered best for, then it absolutely makes sense later portrayals would emphasize those. This explains the discrepancy in the stimulus.

C
Most of the philosophers who lived before Socrates were primarily concerned with natural science.

We don’t care about other philosophers. We need to know why later portrayals of Socrates differed from the contemporaneous one.

D
Socrates was a much more controversial figure in the years before his death than he was in his mid-forties.

We need to know more about Socrates as a controversial figure for this to be right. How did the controversy influence those later portrayals? Why were they so different than the one in Aristophanes? We simply don’t have enough information to choose this answer.

E
Socrates had an influence on many subsequent philosophers who were primarily concerned with natural science.

This doesn’t explain why Socrates was portrayed as an ethical and religious philosopher after his life. If this answer were true and he influenced philosophers concerned with natural science, why didn’t later accounts portray him as the scientific figure in Aristophanes?


4 comments