Summarize Argument
People who switch to "fake fat" products to lose weight are unlikely to achieve their goal of losing weight because they often consume extra calories that negate the savings from the "fake fat" foods.
Identify Conclusion
“Fake fat” foods are unlikely to help people lose weight.
A
People tend to take in a certain number of daily calories, no matter what types of food they eat.
This choice is incorrect because it focuses on the premise that people consume extra calories when they eat “fake fat” products. While this premise suggests that people take in a fixed number of daily calories, it is not the argument’s main conclusion.
B
Most consumers who think that foods with “fake fat” are more nutritious than fatty foods are destined to be disappointed.
This answer misstates the argument’s main conclusion. The argument concludes that consumers who expect “fake fat” foods to help them lose weight will likely be disappointed, not those who expect the foods to be more nutritious.
C
“Fake fat” products are likely to contribute to obesity more than do other foods.
The dietician doesn’t compare “fake fat” to other foods regarding its potential to cause obesity. Since the dietician doesn’t make this comparison, any opinions about “fake fat” causing obesity cannot be considered part of the dietician’s conclusion.
D
“Fake fat” in foods is probably not going to help consumers meet weight loss goals.
This is a good paraphrase of the argument's main conclusion. The stimulus notes that consumers who switch to "fake fat" to lose weight will be disappointed because, as this answer explicitly states, the "fake fat" in foods is unlikely to help consumers lose weight.
E
“Fake fat” in foods is indistinguishable from genuine fat by most consumers on the basis of taste alone.
The stimulus doesn’t make this argument. The dietician says that “fake fat” usually doesn’t help people lose weight but does not discuss whether it tastes like real fat. As the main conclusion must match the argument in the stimulus, it can’t be about something not mentioned.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that heavily increasing taxes on cigarettes sold in the city would reduce smoking in the city. He bases this on surveys which show that cigarette sales drop substantially in cities that increase taxes on cigarettes.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that the survey captures a clear cause-and-effect relationship between higher taxes and lower smoking rates. He assumes that, because taxes are shown to decrease cigarette sales, a drop in cigarette sales would then cause a decrease in smoking. He ignores the possibility that people might seek cigarettes through other means.
He also assumes that what works in the cities with similar tax increases that are represented by the survey will also work in this particular city, without considering any local factors that might differ.
He also assumes that what works in the cities with similar tax increases that are represented by the survey will also work in this particular city, without considering any local factors that might differ.
A
A city-imposed tax on cigarettes will substantially reduce the amount of smoking in the city if the tax is burdensome to the average cigarette consumer.
This does not undermine the reasoning in the argument. Instead, it presents a condition which, if met, would indeed reduce the amount of smoking in the city.
B
Consumers are more likely to continue buying a product if its price increases due to higher taxes than if its price increases for some other reason.
While (B) suggests there might be more effective ways to reduce cigarette purchases, it doesn't change the fact that higher taxes would have some effect. It also doesn't point out the author’s assumption that a reduction in purchases would lead to less smoking.
C
Usually, cigarette sales will increase substantially in the areas surrounding a city after that city imposes stiff taxes on cigarettes.
(C) weakens the author's argument by showing that people might find other ways to get cigarettes after the city’s tax increase. It thus demonstrates that a drop in cigarette purchases will not necessarily lead to less smoking, as the author assumed it would.
D
People who are well informed about the effects of long-term tobacco use are significantly less likely to smoke than are people who are not informed.
This implies that the city’s antismoking education programs could effectively reduce smoking. But it doesn’t undermine the author’s conclusion, which is that increased taxes on cigarettes would effectively reduce smoking.
E
Antismoking education programs that are funded by taxes on cigarettes will tend to lose their funding if they are successful.
Like (D), this speaks to the effectiveness of antismoking education programs; if they successfully reduce smoking, then they’ll lose their funding due to fewer cigarette purchases. However, it doesn't weaken the author's conclusion that higher cigarette taxes will reduce smoking.
Tova: You assume that communication via computer replaces more intimate forms of communication and interaction, when more often it replaces asocial or even antisocial behavior.
Speaker 1 Summary
Communication via computer contributes to the dissolution of lasting communal bonds. Why? Because communication via computer is usually conducted privately and anonymously between people who would otherwise interact in person.
Speaker 2 Summary
Communication via computer more often replaces asocial or antisocial behavior. You cannot assume communication via computer replaces intimate forms of interaction.
Objective
We need a statement that Samuel and Tova disagree on. They disagree whether communication via computer dissolves social bonds. Samuel thinks that it does because communication via computer replaces in-person interactions. Tova thinks that it does not because communication via computer replaces asocial or antisocial interactions.
A
A general trend of modern life is to dissolve the social bonds that formerly connected people.
Neither speaker expresses an opinion on this statement. Neither speaker classifies computer communication as a general trend of modern life.
B
All purely private behavior contributes to the dissolution of social bonds.
Neither speaker expresses an opinion on this statement. Samuel only thinks that some private behavior contributes to this dissolution. “All” private behavior is too strong.
C
Face-to-face communication is more likely to contribute to the creation of social bonds than is anonymous communication.
Tova does not express an opinion on this statement. Tova only expresses that it’s not necessarily true that computer communication dissolves social bonds.
D
It is desirable that new social bonds be created to replace the ones that have dissolved.
Neither speaker expresses an opinion on this statement. We don’t know what either speaker would believe is a desirable outcome.
E
If people were not communicating via computer, they would most likely be engaged in activities that create stronger social bonds.
Samuel and Tova disagree on this statement. Samuel agrees and thinks that this is the reason computer communication can be said to contribute to the dissolution of social bonds. Tova disagrees and thinks that computer communication replaces asocial behavior.