Summarize Argument
The author concludes the EZ Corporation could increase profits by having more staff parties during business hours. He supports this with a study: on average, corporations that encourage frequent social events in the workplace have high profits than corporations that don’t.
Notable Assumptions
The author believes that social events that happen in the workplace, such as those cited in the statistic, happen during work hours. This means the author assumes that the productivity loss of holding a social event during work hours would be outweighed by whatever benefits such events bring to the workplace. He also believes, based on a correlation between workplace social events and higher profits, that the former causes the latter. The author therefore assumes the relationship isn’t reversed (i.e. higher profits causing workplace social events).
A
The great majority of corporations that encourage frequent social events in the workplace do so at least in part because they are already earning above-average profits.
Workplace social events don’t cause higher profits. Corporations earning high profits have the means and financial freedom to host such events.
B
Corporations that have frequent staff parties after business hours sometimes have higher profits than do corporations that have frequent staff parties during business hours.
We’re not talking about how to maximize profits. Even if this were true, holding social events during business hours may still raise profits to some degree.
C
The EZ Corporation already earns above-average profits, and it almost never brings play into the workplace.
Workplace social events could still raise the EZ Corporation’s profits.
D
Frequent social events in a corporate workplace leave employees with less time to perform their assigned duties than they would otherwise have.
We don’t know if this would decrease profits. Perhaps corporate employees work well with strict time constraints.
E
At one time the EZ Corporation encouraged social events in the workplace more frequently than it currently does, but it has not always been one of the most profitable corporations of its size.
The author never says that workplace social events will make a corporation among the most profitable of its size. He simply says hosting such events will boost profits.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that treatment X should be preferred to treatment Y. This is because the treatments are equally beneficial, but treatment X is cheaper and quicker than treatment Y.
Notable Assumptions
The author believes that, all else equal, the treatment that’s quicker and cheaper should be preferred. This means the author assumes that all things really are equal. While we know the treatments provide the same benefits, we don’t know about any possible downsides to treatment X that would make it an inappropriate substitute for treatment Y.
A
Unlike treatment Y, treatment X has produced harmful side effects in laboratory animals.
While treatment X is cheaper and quicker, it may produce harmful side effects. Thus, treatment Y may actually be the preferred treatment.
B
There are other illnesses for which treatment Y is more effective than treatment X.
We don’t care about those illnesses. We’re talking about this illness.
C
Until recently, treatment X was more expensive than treatment Y.
Treatment X isn’t more expensive anymore. We don’t care how much it used to cost.
D
Treatment Y is prescribed more often by physicians than treatment X.
We don’t care how often physicians prescribe these treatments. We care which should be preferred.
E
A third treatment, treatment Z, is even quicker and less expensive than treatment X.
We don’t care about other alternatives. Treatment X may still be preferable to treatment Y.
Summary
Gauge field theory is an area of math that, although investigated in the 19th century, has only recently been applied. Differential geometry is another area of math that was investigated in the 19th century, which was a long time before Einstein determined that one of its offspring, tensor analysis, was appropriate for the theory of general relativity.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Some fields of math may be applicable many years after they are first investigated.
Some fields of math relevant to a problem may have been discovered many years in the past.
Some fields of math relevant to a problem may have been discovered many years in the past.
A
Applications of some new theories or techniques in mathematics are unrecognized until long after the discovery of those theories or techniques.
Strongly supported. The stimulus presents examples of areas of math that were first investigated many years before they were used for certain applications. This is evidence that those particular applications were unknown for a long time.
B
Mathematicians are sometimes able to anticipate which branches of their subject will prove useful to future scientists.
Unsupported. The stimulus doesn’t suggest that any mathematician was able to anticipate which parts of their subject would be useful to future scientists. We don’t have any statements indicating the expectations or thoughts from mathematicians about the future.
C
The discoveries of modern physics would not have been possible without major mathematical advances made in the nineteenth century.
Unsupported. Although we know that the math fields discussed in the stimulus were useful for certain problems related to physics, that doesn’t imply that modern physics wouldn’t have been discovered without those fields.
D
The nineteenth century stands out among other times as a period of great mathematical achievement.
Unsupported. The stimulus doesn’t compare the 19th century with other centuries regarding the level of mathematical achievement.
E
Mathematics tends to advance more quickly than any of the physical sciences.
Unsupported. The stimulus doesn’t compare math to other fields regarding the speed of its advancement.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
How can a report claiming erosion is light and a report claiming erosion is heavy both be accurate?
Objective
Any hypothesis resolving this discrepancy must state a difference between the two reports that explains how they can both be correct. This difference will not question the accuracy of either study, but will allow for erosion to be both heavy and relatively light in this region.
A
Neither report presents an extensive chemical analysis of the soil in the region.
This speaks to the reports’ methodologies without reconciling their different results. The author states that both reports are accurate, so the validity of their conclusions is not in question.
B
Both reports include computer-enhanced satellite photographs.
This speaks to the reports’ methodologies without reconciling their different results. Both reports are accurate, whether or not they include satellite photographs.
C
One report was prepared by scientists from a university, while the other report was prepared by scientists from a private consulting firm.
This refers to the people who produced the reports without addressing their findings. It does not explain how their conclusions can be simultaneously accurate.
D
One report focuses on regional topsoil erosion, while the other report focuses on riverbank erosion resulting from seasonal floods.
This explains why both reports can be accurate. They studied different types of erosion, so their results are not in conflict.
E
One report cost nearly twice as much to prepare as did the other report.
This speaks to the resources used to prepare the reports without addressing their findings. Both reports are accurate, regardless of their cost.