Self-paced
Some people have been promoting a new herbal mixture as a remedy for the common cold. ███ ███████ █████████ █████ █████ ███████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██████ ██████████ ███ ███████████ █ ████ █████████ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ████ ███ ███████ ██ ██ █████████ ████ ███████ ███████ ████████ ████ ███ ███████ ████ ██ █████████ ████ ███████ █████ ████ ██████ ████ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ████████ ██ ███████ ████ ██████ █████████ ████ █ ████ █████ ██ █████ ███ ██████████ █████ █████ ███ ████ ██████ ███ ████ █████ ███ ██ ███ ███ ███ ████████ ██ ██ █████████ ███ ███████████
Argument Breakdown
The skeptical cold sufferer concludes that a new herbal mixture can't be an effective remedy for the common cold. Why not? Because most people with a cold want to recover quickly. For this reason, the sufferer argues, if the remedy were effective, then most people with colds would be using it. However, many people have colds but don’t use the remedy.
Effectively, the cold sufferer is saying that the predicted results that one would expect to see if the remedy were effective are not, in fact, happening. And since the predicted results aren't occurring, the cold sufferer concludes that the remedy isn't actually effective.
This also isn't a perfect argument—it requires some assumptions to make sense. For one, the cold sufferer has to assume that there aren't other reasons not to use this remedy, unrelated to its effectiveness. If it were effective but had very severe side effects, for example, the conclusion wouldn't follow.
20.
Each of the following is ██ ██████████ ████████ ██ ███ █████████ ████ ██████████ ████████ ███████
a
Enough of the ███████ ██ ████████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ██████ █████████ ████ █ █████
A limited supply of the mixture could explain why many people don’t use it even if it were effective. So to support the conclusion of ineffectiveness, the sufferer must assume that there’s enough of the mixture to supply most people.
b
The mixture does ███ ████ ████ ███████ ██████ ██████ ██ ████ ████ ██████ ███ ████ █████ █████ █████ ███
Negative side effects could deter many people from using the mixture, so the sufferer must assume that this isn't the case. Otherwise, the mixture could absolutely be effective even though most people don't use it.
c
The mixture is ████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██████ █████████ ███ ████ ██ ████ ███████████ ███ ███████ ██████
The sufferer claims that the mixture is not effective as a remedy for the common cold, but never discusses prevention. Because the argument is just about curing existing colds rather than preventing future ones, there’s no need to assume that the mixture prevents future colds; prevention is beyond the scope of the argument. And since this is an except question, (C) not being necessary makes it the correct answer.
d
The mixture is ██████ ██████ █████ ████ ██████ █████████ ████ █ ████ ██ █████ ██ ███
A general lack of awareness could explain why many people don’t use the mixture, so the argument must assume that people know about it. Without this assumption, it would be impossible to conclude that the mixture is ineffective just because people don't use it.
e
There are no █████████ ████ ████████ █████████ ████ ████ ██████ ███ ████ █████ ██████ ██ ███ ████████
If it’s possible that there are multiple effective remedies, and people simply chose other effective remedies over this mixture, then the mixture could still be effective. So to support the conclusion that the mixture is ineffective based on people's lack of use, it's necessary for the sufferer to assume that (D) is the case.