Section 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Section 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Section 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Section 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Section 1 Games 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Section 2 Args 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Section 3 Args 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Section 4 RC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 index
section 1 question 1 Game one: Assign eight students to three classes. Classes 1 and 2 get three new students each; class 3 gets two students. Clue #1: Put R in class 1. Clue #2: Put S in class 3. Clue #3: SY WY (deduction: no Y in class 3). Clue #4: VZ Clue #5: If T is in 1 ===> Z is in 1 (so V is not in 1). Contrapositive: If Z is not in 1, or V is in 1 ===> T is not in 1. What you know so far: Y Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 R _ S _ Question #1: Which of the following is an acceptable solution? Applying clue #2 allows you to eliminate (B). Clue #3 allows you to eliminate (E). Clue #4 allows you to eliminate (C). Clue #5 allows you to eliminate (A). The only choice left is (D).
section 1 question 2 Game one: Assign eight students to three classes. Classes 1 and 2 get three new students each; class 3 gets two students. Clue #1: Put R in class 1. Clue #2: Put S in class 3. Clue #3: SY WY (deduction: no Y in class 3). Clue #4: VZ Clue #5: If T is in 1 ===> Z is in 1 (so V is not in 1). Contrapositive: If Z is not in 1, or V is in 1 ===> T is not in 1. What you know so far: Y Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 R _ S _ Question #2: Which classes could V be added to? The only restriction on V is to keep V away from Z. This can be accomplished no matter where you put V. The credited response is (E). You can also skip this question and let the work you do on the other questions guide you to the answer.
section 1 question 3 Game one: Assign eight students to three classes. Classes 1 and 2 get three new students each; class 3 gets two students. Clue #1: Put R in class 1. Clue #2: Put S in class 3. Clue #3: SY WY (deduction: no Y in class 3). Clue #4: VZ Clue #5: If T is in 1 ===> Z is in 1 (so V is not in 1). Contrapositive: If Z is not in 1, or V is in 1 ===> T is not in 1. What you know so far: Y Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 R _ S _ Question #3: If X goes in class 1, who must go in class 2? You have to fill five spots with T,V,W,Y,Z. You need to keep WY and VZ apart, so what you have to do is use class 1 and class 3 as a place to put one of each of those bad pairs. Here s what you have so far: Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 R _ S X The only way you can get everyone in classes without violating any clues is to put T in class 2. Therefore, the credited response is (A).
section 1 question 4 Game one: Assign eight students to three classes. Classes 1 and 2 get three new students each; class 3 gets two students. Clue #1: Put R in class 1. Clue #2: Put S in class 3. Clue #3: SY WY (deduction: no Y in class 3). Clue #4: VZ Clue #5: If T is in 1 ===> Z is in 1 (so V is not in 1). Contrapositive: If Z is not in 1, or V is in 1 ===> T is not in 1. What you know so far: Y Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 R _ S _ Question #4: If X is added to class 3, which pair of students could not be added to class 1 together? Class 3 is full. WY and VZ must be kept apart. Put one of each pair in class 1, and put the rest in class 2. Class 2 will consist of T and two others. Here s what you have at this point: Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 R S X What this means is that T cannot be in Class 1. Therefore, you should pick (E).
section 1 question 5 Game one: Assign eight students to three classes. Classes 1 and 2 get three new students each; class 3 gets two students. Clue #1: Put R in class 1. Clue #2: Put S in class 3. Clue #3: SY WY (deduction: no Y in class 3). Clue #4: VZ Clue #5: If T is in 1 ===> Z is in 1 (so V is not in 1). Contrapositive: If Z is not in 1, or V is in 1 ===> T is not in 1. What you know so far: Y Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 R _ S _ Question #5: If T is in class 3, who must go in class 2? Class 3 is now full. WY and VZ must be kept apart. Put one of each pair in class 1, and put the rest in class 2. Class 2 will consist of X and two others. Your diagram should look like this: Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 R S T Therefore, the credited response is (C).
section 1 question 6 Game one: Assign eight students to three classes. Classes 1 and 2 get three new students each; class 3 gets two students. Clue #1: Put R in class 1. Clue #2: Put S in class 3. Clue #3: SY WY (deduction: no Y in class 3). Clue #4: VZ Clue #5: If T is in 1 ===> Z is in 1 (so V is not in 1). Contrapositive: If Z is not in 1, or V is in 1 ===> T is not in 1. What you know so far: Y Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 R _ S _ Question #6: Which one of the following must be true? Because these are all conditional statements, you should think about whether it is worth all the extra work to get one right answer (you re going to have to try lots of answers). If you are not attempting all four games, this is the kind of question you should consider skipping. The credited response is (D), because if you put V and X in class 1, then class 1 is full. You know that Y must go in class 2 (Y can t go in class 1 because it s full and Y can t go in class 3 because S and Y cannot be in the same class). Finally, the application of clue #3 makes you put W in class 3.
section 1 question 7 Game two: Assign four lions (F,G,H,J) and two tigers (K,M) to six cages, one animal per cage. Clue #1: K cannot be across from M. Clue #2: No K or M in space 1. Clue #3: H must be in space 6. Clue #4: J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space. Clue #5: K cannot be across from H. (Deduction: K cannot be in space 3). Here s the diagram so far: Space 1: K, M Space 2: J Space 3: K Space 4: J Space 5: Space 6: H Since J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space, you know that KJ are in 2,3 or 4,5. Question #7: Which answer must be true? You can either save this question until the end of the game so you have more information to work with or you can attempt to answer the question from the deductions that you ve already made. In this case, you know that (E) is the credited response. See the analysis to the right of the above diagram for an explanation.
section 1 question 8 Game two: Assign four lions (F,G,H,J) and two tigers (K,M) to six cages, one animal per cage. Clue #1: K cannot be across from M. Clue #2: No K or M in space 1. Clue #3: H must be in space 6. Clue #4: J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space. Clue #5: K cannot be across from H. (Deduction: K cannot be in space 3). Here s the diagram so far: Space 1: K, M Space 2: J Space 3: K Space 4: J Space 5: Space 6: H Since J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space, you know that KJ are in 2,3 or 4,5. Question #8: Which answer could be true? This is a good question to save until the end since you will probably run across an example of one of these choices working while you are doing the other questions. Answer choices (C), (D), and (E) can be eliminated because you know that J cannot be in space 4 (see diagram) and that KJ are adjacent to each other in one row or the other (see the deductions off to the side of the diagram). To determine which of the remaining two answers are correct, try one. If the one you try works, that s the answer. If it doesn t work, then the other choice is the answer. In this case, the credited response is (B).
section 1 question 9 Game two: Assign four lions (F,G,H,J) and two tigers (K,M) to six cages, one animal per cage. Clue #1: K cannot be across from M. Clue #2: No K or M in space 1. Clue #3: H must be in space 6. Clue #4: J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space. Clue #5: K cannot be across from H. (Deduction: K cannot be in space 3). Here s the diagram so far: Space 1: K, M Space 2: J Space 3: K Space 4: J Space 5: Space 6: H Since J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space, you know that KJ are in 2,3 or 4,5. Question #9: Which answer must be true? Whew. What s the deal with all these which questions. The answer to this question is (C). If you put KJ in spaces 2 and 3, M must go in the other row (it can t go in space 1). If you put KJ in spaces 4 and 5, M must go in the other row (H already occupies space 6).
section 1 question 10 Game two: Assign four lions (F,G,H,J) and two tigers (K,M) to six cages, one animal per cage. Clue #1: K cannot be across from M. Clue #2: No K or M in space 1. Clue #3: H must be in space 6. Clue #4: J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space. Clue #5: K cannot be across from H. (Deduction: K cannot be in space 3). Here s the diagram so far: Space 1: K, M Space 2: J Space 3: K Space 4: J Space 5: Space 6: H Since J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space, you know that KJ are in 2,3 or 4,5. Question #10: If K and H are in the same row, which of the following must be true? This means that KJ are in spaces 4 and 5. Your diagram should look like this so far: Space 1: M Space 2: Space 3: Space 4: K Space 5: J Space 6: H The only answer choice that you can conclusively prove with this evidence is (E). (B), (C), and (D) could be true, but the question is asking you what must be true.
section 1 question 11 Game two: Assign four lions (F,G,H,J) and two tigers (K,M) to six cages, one animal per cage. Clue #1: K cannot be across from M. Clue #2: No K or M in space 1. Clue #3: H must be in space 6. Clue #4: J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space. Clue #5: K cannot be across from H. (Deduction: K cannot be in space 3). Here s the diagram so far: Space 1: K, M Space 2: J Space 3: K Space 4: J Space 5: Space 6: H Since J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space, you know that KJ are in 2,3 or 4,5. Question #11: If J is in space 3, which answer could be true? Here s your diagram so far: Space 1: M Space 2: K Space 3: J Space 4: Space 5: M Space 6: H Where do you suppose M goes? Space 4. Any answer involving M or space 4 that doesn t actually have M in space 4 is going to be wrong. Eliminate (B), (D), and (E). (A) is wrong because K is already in space 2. The only answer left is (B).
section 1 question 12 Game two: Assign four lions (F,G,H,J) and two tigers (K,M) to six cages, one animal per cage. Clue #1: K cannot be across from M. Clue #2: No K or M in space 1. Clue #3: H must be in space 6. Clue #4: J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space. Clue #5: K cannot be across from H. (Deduction: K cannot be in space 3). Here s the diagram so far: Space 1: K, M Space 2: J Space 3: K Space 4: J Space 5: Space 6: H Since J must be in a space numbered one higher than K s space, you know that KJ are in 2,3 or 4,5. Question #12: Which of the following must be true? The credited response is (B) because you either have to put KJ in spaces 2 and 3 which makes you put M in 4 (see question #11) or you have to put KJ in 4 and 5. In either case, K or M must be in space 4 (and they are both tigers).
section 1 question 13 Game three: Another game with stuff facing other stuff. Eight houses built in one of three styles. The rules are as follows. Clue #1: Adjacent houses are different styles. Clue #2: Split-level houses cannot be across from each other. Clue #3: R ===> RT or TR. Clue #4: House 3 is a ranch house. Clue #5: House 6 is a split-level house. House 5 cannot be S (clue #2) or R (clue #1), so it s T. Houses that have only two possibilities are marked accordingly. House 8 must be T (clues #1and #3). Here s what you have so far: 1: T/S 3: R 5: T 7: R/S 2: 4: R/T 6: S 8: T Question #13: Which house cannot be a T? Check your diagram and pick answer choice (D).
section 1 question 14 Game three: Another game with stuff facing other stuff. Eight houses built in one of three styles. The rules are as follows. Clue #1: Adjacent houses are different styles. Clue #2: Split-level houses cannot be across from each other. Clue #3: R ===> RT or TR. Clue #4: House 3 is a ranch house. Clue #5: House 6 is a split-level house. House 5 cannot be S (clue #2) or R (clue #1), so it s T. Houses that have only two possibilities are marked accordingly. House 8 must be T (clues #1and #3). Here s what you have so far: 1: T/S 3: R 5: T 7: R/S 2: 4: R/T 6: S 8: T Question #14: If two ranch houses are across from each other, which answer could be true? The only place where you can have ranch houses across from each other are spaces 3 and 4. Clue #3 allows you to deduce that house 2 is a T. So you know the following: 1: T/S 3: R 5: T 7: R/S 2: T 4: R 6: S 8: T Comparing what you know to the answer choices, the only one that is possible is answer choice (B).
section 1 question 15 Game three: Another game with stuff facing other stuff. Eight houses built in one of three styles. The rules are as follows. Clue #1: Adjacent houses are different styles. Clue #2: Split-level houses cannot be across from each other. Clue #3: R ===> RT or TR. Clue #4: House 3 is a ranch house. Clue #5: House 6 is a split-level house. House 5 cannot be S (clue #2) or R (clue #1), so it s T. Houses that have only two possibilities are marked accordingly. House 8 must be T (clues #1and #3). Here s what you have so far: 1: T/S 3: R 5: T 7: R/S 2: 4: R/T 6: S 8: T Question #15: If house 4 is a T, which answer could be true? Your diagram so far should look like this 1: T/S 3: R 5: T 7: R/S 2: R/S 4: T 6: S 8: T The application of clue #1 allows you to narrow down your possible solutions. The only one that works is (A).
section 1 question 16 Game three: Another game with stuff facing other stuff. Eight houses built in one of three styles. The rules are as follows. Clue #1: Adjacent houses are different styles. Clue #2: Split-level houses cannot be across from each other. Clue #3: R ===> RT or TR. Clue #4: House 3 is a ranch house. Clue #5: House 6 is a split-level house. House 5 cannot be S (clue #2) or R (clue #1), so it s T. Houses that have only two possibilities are marked accordingly. House 8 must be T (clues #1and #3). Here s what you have so far: 1: T/S 3: R 5: T 7: R/S 2: 4: R/T 6: S 8: T Question #16: The work that you did on the previous question should help you arrive at the conclusion that you could have only one ranch house on the block. Houses 2 and 7 could be split-level and house 1 could be Tudor. Therefore, the answer is (A).
section 1 question 17 Game three: Another game with stuff facing other stuff. Eight houses built in one of three styles. The rules are as follows. Clue #1: Adjacent houses are different styles. Clue #2: Split-level houses cannot be across from each other. Clue #3: R ===> RT or TR. Clue #4: House 3 is a ranch house. Clue #5: House 6 is a split-level house. House 5 cannot be S (clue #2) or R (clue #1), so it s T. Houses that have only two possibilities are marked accordingly. House 8 must be T (clues #1and #3). Here s what you have so far: 1: T/S 3: R 5: T 7: R/S 2: 4: R/T 6: S 8: T Question #17: If no house faces a house of the same style (a new condition), which of the following must be true? The only other deduction that the additional condition allows is that house 4 is a T (it s across from R and next to S). Make the following additions to your original diagram: 1: T/S 3: R 5: T 7: R/S 2: 4: T 6: S 8: T The credited response is (E).
section 1 question 18 Game three: Another game with stuff facing other stuff. Eight houses built in one of three styles. The rules are as follows. Clue #1: Adjacent houses are different styles. Clue #2: Split-level houses cannot be across from each other. Clue #3: R ===> RT or TR. Clue #4: House 3 is a ranch house. Clue #5: House 6 is a split-level house. House 5 cannot be S (clue #2) or R (clue #1), so it s T. Houses that have only two possibilities are marked accordingly. House 8 must be T (clues #1and #3). Here s what you have so far: 1: T/S 3: R 5: T 7: R/S 2: 4: R/T 6: S 8: T Question #18: If house 6 is no longer an S (removal of a condition), which of the following CANNOT be the styles of houses for houses 2,4,6, and 8? The removal of the condition leaves these houses wide open. Take one clue at a time and find one choice that violates a clue. Clue #3 reveals that choice (A) is the answer. The ranch house in space 2 would have to be next to a Tudor house in space 4.
section 1 question 19 Game four: Five teams are ranked and play each other in alternating odd-numbered and even-numbered rounds. The initial ranking is R,J,S,M,L. In a round, if a lower ranked team defeats a higher ranked team, then the two teams switch positions. Question #19: Which is a possible order after one even-numbered round? In an even-numbered round, the fifth ranked team plays nobody. Therefore, the team that started in fifth place (team L) will be in fifth place at the end of the round. The only answer that satisfies this condition is choice (D).
section 1 question 20 Game four: Five teams are ranked and play each other in alternating odd-numbered and even-numbered rounds. The initial ranking is R,J,S,M,L. In a round, if a lower ranked team defeats a higher ranked team, then the two teams switch positions. Question #20: If two rounds have been played (odd first, even second), and the lower ranked team has won every match, which answer does not have to be true? 1 2 3 4 5 Start: R J S M L Rd. #1 (odd) R S J L M Rd. #2 (even) S R L J M The only answer that does not have to be true (in fact, it s false) is answer choice (E).
section 1 question 21 Game four: Five teams are ranked and play each other in alternating odd-numbered and even-numbered rounds. The initial ranking is R,J,S,M,L. In a round, if a lower ranked team defeats a higher ranked team, then the two teams switch positions. Question #21: Which answer could be true after two rounds of matches have been played? (A) is the credited response because J could win an odd numbered match (against S) to retain second place and then defeat R in the even numbered round to move into first place.
section 1 question 22 Game four: Five teams are ranked and play each other in alternating odd-numbered and even-numbered rounds. The initial ranking is R,J,S,M,L. In a round, if a lower ranked team defeats a higher ranked team, then the two teams switch positions. Question #22: If after three rounds M is in fourth and J and L have not lost, which answer can be true? 1 2 3 4 5 Start: R J S M L Rd #1 (odd) R J S L M Rd #2 (even) J R L S M Rd #3 (odd) J L R M S If you check this against the answers, you ll find that (C) is the answer.
section 1 question 23 Game four: Five teams are ranked and play each other in alternating odd-numbered and even-numbered rounds. The initial ranking is R,J,S,M,L. In a round, if a lower ranked team defeats a higher ranked team, then the two teams switch positions. Question #23: If after three rounds, M has won all three matches and the others remain in their original order, who is in position 3? 1 2 3 4 5 Start R J S M L Rd #1 (odd) R J S M L Rd #2 (even) R J M S L Rd #3 (odd) R M J S L J is in position 3, so the answer is (A).
section 1 question 24 Game four: Five teams are ranked and play each other in alternating odd-numbered and even-numbered rounds. The initial ranking is R,J,S,M,L. In a round, if a lower ranked team defeats a higher ranked team, then the two teams switch positions. Question #24: If after three rounds the order is RJLSM, then what could be the position of the teams after the second round. Given that a team can move a most one position per round, any answer choice that violates this condition can be eliminated. Starting with R, you can eliminate answer choice (B). How can R move from last to first in one round? If you focus on J, you can eliminate choices (D) and (E) because J cannot move from last to second. Finally, if you focus on L you can eliminate choice (A) because L cannot move from last to third. The only choice left is (C), and that s a good thing since that s the right answer.
section 2 question 1 Question #1: Resolve the paradox. The percentage of raccoons infected with rabies has doubled, but the number of raccoons confirmed as having rabies was cut almost in half. This is a classic percents versus numbers argument. If the raccoon population is much smaller now than it was two years ago, it is entirely possible that the percentage of raccoons with rabies could have gone up while the total number of raccoons with confirmed cases of rabies dropped. (A) Animals other than raccoons are not the issue of the argument. (B) This is the credited response. (C) Distemper is not the issue of the argument. (D) When the raccoons are observed is not the issue of the argument. (E) Neighboring cities are not the issue of the argument.
section 2 question 2 Question #2: Weaken the patent reviewers argument. The reviewers decided against granting a patent for the genetically engineered mouse based on a rule that patents cannot be granted for new animal varieties. To weaken the reviewers argument, you should try to find something that attacks the stated reason for rejecting the application. (A) This is the credited response. A genetically engineered mouse is not a domesticated farm animal. (B) No mention is made of any relevance of whether this is or is not the first application to come from the university. (C) This particular application needs to be considered on the basis of what you know about this application. Past applications are not the issue of the argument. (D) Plants are not the issue of the argument. (E) This answer tells you about an explicit decision made about new varieties of animals developed by selective breeding. It doesn t tell you anything specific about genetically engineered varieties and is therefore not the issue of the argument.
section 2 question 3 Questions 3-4 50 municipalities draw their water supply from a deep aquifer that is free from disease-causing bacteria. 30 of those 50 municipalities chlorinate their water in order to counter the contamination that can occur due to flaws in pipes or storage tanks. The 20 communities that did not add chlorine to the water supply had less bacterial contamination than the 30 communities that added chlorine to the water supply. Question #3: Inference. Find something that you know to be true from the information in the passage. (A) Since the communities are all using the same water source (deep aquifer), the initial decision to use chlorine must be based on some other factor. (B) Although we know that the water in the deep aquifer does not contain any disease-causing bacteria, we are not told whether other kinds of bacteria may be present. (C) No comparison is made to other possible sources of water. (D) This is the credited response. We know that all the communities water supplies meet the regional government standards, and we further know that the bacteria levels in some communities water supply is higher than the bacteria levels in the water supply of other communities. Therefore, there are some communities who have bacteria in the water supply that still meet government standards. (E) No other disinfecting agents are mentioned, so you have no basis to make any comparisons.
section 2 question 4 Questions 3-4 50 municipalities draw their water supply from a deep aquifer that is free from disease-causing bacteria. 30 of those 50 municipalities chlorinate their water in order to counter the contamination that can occur due to flaws in pipes or storage tanks. The 20 communities that did not add chlorine to the water supply had less bacterial contamination than the 30 communities that added chlorine to the water supply. Question #4: Explain why the communities that chlorinate their water have more bacterial contamination than communities that don t. (A) The qualities of chlorine do not explain why the untreated water has less contamination than the treated water. (B) No mention is made of why a community would choose not to chlorinate the water supply. (C) This exacerbates the paradox. You need to find a plausible reason that the untreated water would have less bacteria. (D) Other water disinfectants are not the issue of the argument. (E) This explains the paradox. The quality of the pipes and storage tanks needs to be considered as a contributing factor to the level of bacteria in the water supply.
section 2 question 5 Question #5: Undermine the proposed explanation for the drop in the English songbird population. The author of the argument claims that the drop in songbird population is due to the increase in the magpie population. To undermine this proposed cause, you either need to present an alternative cause or demonstrate that where the cause is absent, the effect is still present. If this were true, there must be some other cause. (A) Because the argument is about the change in the songbird population in recent years, the fact that official records have only been kept over the last 30 years is not a relevant attack. (B) The variance in the number of eggs laid from one species to another does not by itself explain a drop in the overall songbird population. (C) This is the credited response. The drop in the songbird population must be due to some other factor given that the magpie population has remained constant in these areas. (D) This supports the explanation and is therefore a bad answer choice to a question that asks you to undermine the explanation. (E) This leaves the explanation intact and is therefore a bad answer choice.
section 2 question 6 Question #6: Identify the assumption. The author argues that computation became possible 5500 years ago because of the invention of a systematic method for writing numerals. The author assumes that computation was impossible in the absence of a systematic method for writing numerals. (A) The grooves and scratches that the author refers to are unrelated to the connection that the author is trying to draw between a systematic method for writing numerals and the possibility of computation. (B) Available writing surfaces do not address the connection the author draws between a systematic method for writing numerals and the possibility of computation. (C) Whether there were people who lived before these marks and scratches were made does not address the author s connection between a systematic method for writing numerals and the possibility of computation. (D) This is the credited response. If you make a conclusion that something is a necessary prerequisite for a phenomenon, you are assuming that the absence of the prerequisite entails the absence of the phenomenon. (E) The reasons that a systematic method for writing numerals was invented have no bearing on establishing a necessary relationship between the existence of such a system and the possibility of computation.
section 2 question 7 Question #7: Parallel the flaw in the politician s reply. The politician states that since the absence of one thing coincided with the presence of another thing, that the presence of the first thing will coincide with the absence of the second thing. It is entirely possible that there is no such relation between the two phenomena and that there are other forces at work. In this case, the credited response is (C).
section 2 question 8 Question #8: Which answer choice most clearly violates the stated principle that designers should produce machines while making allowances for the fact that consumers make certain associations? These machines should be designed with respect to consumer expectations to avoid problems of danger or inefficiency. (A) This conforms to the principle because people who do use typewriters associate the location of the keys with the traditional layout of the keyboard. (B) This conforms to the principle. The instruments are where pilots expect them to be. (C) This conforms to the principle. The keys are the shape that car owners expect. (D) This conforms to the principle. Drivers see triangular signs and read that to mean yield. (E) This is the credited response. One would expect the start button to be green and the stop button to be red. The switch in color produces some confusion and therefore introduces a level of inefficiency.
section 2 question 9 Question #9: Inference. Find something that you can conclusively prove given the information in the passage. (A) Although we know that the increase in the use of electrical energy exceeded the increase in the use of energy in general, we are not given any information regarding raw numbers so there is no basis to compare the amount of electrical energy used to the amount of other types of energy used. (B) To know whether this is true or not, you would have to know how much electrical energy was used in 1973 and how much of other types of energy was used in 1973. (C) This is the credited response. Notice that it speaks in terms of proportions rather than actual numbers. If electrical energy use is increasing faster than other forms of energy, it follows that electrical energy makes up a larger percentage of energy use as a whole. (D) The only way to determine what percentage of the GNP each type of energy contributes, you would have to know the amount of electrical energy used in either 1973 or 1989 and the amount of nonelectrical energy used in those same years. (E) The rationale behind this answer is similar to the rationale behind choice (D). To determine whether or not this answer is true, you would have to know the actual amounts of electrical and non-electrical energy used in 1973.
section 2 question 10 Question #10: Identify the flaw in the argument. The author questions the claim that robots will liberate humanity from hazardous and demeaning work because someone will be needed to maintain the robots. The argument is therefore that one type of demeaning work is being traded for another. The relevant comparison, however, is not the type of work but the amount of hazardous and demeaning work that robots might save. If 100 people are liberated from assembly line work, and 5 people are needed to maintain the robots that are now doing the work, then 95 people have been liberated and as a result some demeaning work has been eliminated. (A) Although elimination of jobs is a valid real-life concern, it is not the issue of this argument. (B) The author is not saying that robots create demeaning work, the author is saying that robots do not eliminate demeaning work. (C) The issue of the argument is whether robots will eliminate demeaning work, not whether engineers who design robots find their work demeaning. (D) There is no emotional appeal in this argument. The flaw of the argument is that it confuses type of work for amount of work. (E) This is the credited response. It demonstrates that the author has neglected to consider a plausible case where demeaning work is eliminated.
section 2 question 11 Question #11: Which of the following is most likely to be true given the information presented in the argument? The argument states that acoustic devices to monitor needle wear will become standard equipment in automated apparel factories. The author argues that it would be inefficient to hire people to monitor needles. The author is assuming that the needles have to be monitored for wear. (A) The relative frequency of failed needles in traditional versus automated factories (and thereby the relative frequency of ruined items) is never discussed. Will the automated system identify worn needles more reliably than the traditional system? (B) What employees will do in the automated apparel factory of the future is never discussed. (C) The issue of the argument is replacing worn needles. Whether or not traditional factories have any automated equipment is not discussed in the argument. (D) This is the credited response. If the needles wore out at predictable rates, they would not need to be monitored. (E) Although we know that acoustic devices will be used to monitor needles, we don t know if worn needles get louder or quieter. Although common sense may have you thinking that they would get louder, that assertion is not supported by the information in the argument.
section 2 question 12 Questions 12-13 Alexander makes the point that the chemical waste dump should be cleaned up immediately because of a pressing obligation to redress the harm done to local forests and wildlife. This obligation supersedes cost considerations in Alexander s opinion. Teresa counters Alexander s claim by stating that the town s first priority is the health of its people. The only money spent on cleanup should be directed at removing any significant health hazard to people. Question #12: Principle. Find an answer that supports Teresa s position. (A) Teresa argues from the perspective of health and the priorities of the town, not economic interests. (B) This is the credited response. Teresa has identified the health of the townspeople as the town s first priority. This principle supports her position that we need not redress the harm done to local forests and wildlife in the absence of a real threat to human health. (C) Although Teresa says that the town s first priority is the health of its people; there is nothing that would communicate that cost is never a consideration. It also fails to address why the town wouldn t be obligated to clean up the waste dump for the sake of the native forests and wildlife. (D) Teresa states that if there is a significant health hazard, then an environmental hazard should be cleaned to the point that the significant risk does not exist. You don t have enough information to know her position regarding slight health risks. (E) Who decides the significance of an environmental risk (and therefore the importance of eliminating that risk) is not relevant to Teresa s argument. Teresa s argument is that environmental cleanup should only take place in the face of a significant risk to human health.
section 2 question 13 Questions 12-13 Alexander makes the point that the chemical waste dump should be cleaned up immediately because of a pressing obligation to redress the harm done to local forests and wildlife. This obligation supersedes cost considerations in Alexander s opinion. Teresa counters Alexander s claim by stating that the town s first priority is the health of its people. The only money spent on cleanup should be directed at removing any significant health hazard to people. Question #13: What is the point at issue between Alexander and Teresa? Alexander thinks that the chemical dump ought to be cleaned up in order to redress the harm that has been done to local forests and wildlife. Teresa argues that the dump should only be cleaned if it poses a significant threat to human health. In the absence of a significant threat to human health, Alexander and Teresa disagree that the dump should be cleaned up. (A) The argument centers on the cleanup, rather than the maintenance of a waste dump. (B) Teresa never discusses cost, so this is not the point at issue between the two. (C) Neither of them discusses who should determine the public health risk posed by a chemical waste dump. (D) This is the credited response. Alexander agrees with this statement, Teresa disagrees. (E) Neither of them discusses destroying forests and wildlife in order to create a chemical waste dump. In this situation they are talking about cleaning up a chemical waste dump in order to redress the harm done by a waste dump. It isn t clear that anything was destroyed to make room for the dump. It s possible that there was room for the dump when it was established, but the presence of the dump has caused damage that Alexander argues should be addressed.
section 2 question 14 Question #14: Assumption. The author concludes that the per capita GDP of country A has risen between 1980 and 1990. The author offers as evidence for this claim the fact that the difference between the GDP of country A and the GDP of the European Economic Community has widened by $1000. However, there are two ways the gap could widen. First of all, it could be true that country A s GDP did increase. Alternatively, it could be true that the GDP of the European Economic Community has dropped. To conclude that the GDP of country A actually increased, you would need to know that the GDP of the European Economic Community did not drop by more than $1000. (A) Because these figures are calculated on a per capita basis, the change in population is irrelevant. (B) It isn t a necessary assumption that the GDP of the European Economic Community fell, it s just important to know that it didn t fall by more than $1000. (C) Since we are comparing country A to the European Economic Community as a whole, the relative standing of nations within that community is not relevant to the argument. (D) This is the credited response. If this were not true, the conclusion would not make sense. (E) See the explanation for choice (C).
section 2 question 15 Question #15: Resolve the paradox. Why did it take the private contractor 28 days to do a job that was estimated to take six months? (A) This does not impact the time it would take to do the job. (B) Because this choice draws no distinction between municipal road crews and private contractors, it does not resolve the paradox. (C) See answer choice (B). (D) This would seem to exacerbate the paradox. Why would fewer workers complete a job in much less time? (E) This explains the time difference. Municipal agencies must deal with extra details that extend the length of time it takes to do the job.
section 2 question 16 Question #16: Weaken the argument. The author concludes that the population of a particular shark species is the same as it was in 1973 because the CPUE (catch per unit of effort) is the same today as it was in 1973. Because CPUE is defined by sharks caught per hour per kilometer of gill net, the author must assume that there were no changes to any other aspect of the fishing process that would change the meaning of the CPUE. (A) Because the argument is specifically about South Australia, other parts of the world are not relevant to this argument. (B) General factoids about sharks are not going to help you establish a distinction between 1973 and the present that will allow you to attack the argument. (C) This answer choice fails to make any distinctions between 1973 and the present. Therefore, it is not useful information to weaken the argument. (D) Again, this fails to draw an additional distinction between 1973 and the present. (E) This is the credited response. CPUE has a very different meaning at present because there is an additional tool that allows shark fishermen to locate sharks with less effort. If the CPUE has remained the same, it is probably true that the shark population has diminished since 1973.
section 2 question 17 Questions 17-18 Winston argues that the Public Transportation Agency should eliminate late-night service because the cost of providing the service exceeds the revenue from providing the service. Ping points out that if latenight service were eliminated, daytime ridership would also drop because some folks would stop using the bus during daytime hours (they would have no way to get home). Question #17: How does Ping respond to Winston s argument? Ping brings up a consideration that Winston has missed (the elimination of late-night service will impact daytime ridership). (A) What term do you think is being carefully redefined? (B) This is the credited response. Winston fails to consider the impact on daytime ridership that the decision to discontinue late-night service will have. (C) The premise that Ping provides weakens Winston s argument. (D) Do you see detailed statistical evidence here? (E) Although Ping calls Winston s conclusion into question, Ping is not proposing a solution to the PTA s dilemma.
section 2 question 18 Questions 17-18 Winston argues that the Public Transportation Agency should eliminate late-night service because the cost of providing the service exceeds the revenue from providing the service. Ping points out that if latenight service were eliminated, daytime ridership would also drop because some folks would stop using the bus during daytime hours (they would have no way to get home). Question #18: Strengthen Ping s argument. Ping argues that late-night ridership is part of a round trip. Therefore, eliminating late-night service would impact ridership during other time periods. (A) This is the credited response. If this were true, the effect that Ping proposes would most likely happen. (B) Ping s argument has to do with round trips taken on the bus, not the preferences of the riders. (C) What happened in the past is not relevant to the argument. (D) The size of the deficit has nothing to do with Ping s argument. (E) Ping s conclusion centers around the effect that suspension of late-night service will have on overall ridership. Bonuses for bus drivers are not relevant to the argument.
section 2 question 19 Question #19: Parallel the reasoning. One of two options is chosen because the better option serves one requirement better and the better option also lacks a drawback that the worse option has. This is a particularly difficult parallel question, so you should make sure that you ve done all the other questions in the section before you get to this one. By the way, the credited response is (A).
section 2 question 20 Question #20: Inference. You are told that the proportion of students from outside Markland has decreased over the past 10 years. You are also told that academic standards have risen during that same period. These two factors have not been explicitly linked, so you should avoid making that leap. (A) There is not sufficient information to link tuition and the improvement of academic standards at Central Markland College. (B) There is not sufficient information to establish causal relationships of any kind. (C) Although you know that the proportion of students from Markland increased and the proportion of students from outside of Markland decreased, you do not know if the total enrollment at Central Markland College has changed. Therefore, you do not have sufficient information to draw conclusions about actual numbers of students. (D) Other colleges in Markland are never mentioned. Do other colleges in Markland exist? (E) This is the credited response. If the per capita revenue from tuition has increased in the face of proportionally smaller enrollment of higher paying students, tuition must have increased. If tuition didn t increase, then the per capita revenue would have to shrink if there is a larger proportion of students who pay lower tuition (Markland residents).
section 2 question 21 Question #21: Support the entomologists conclusion. The entomologists conclude that the introduction of a fungus that is poisonous to gypsy moth caterpillars has caused a decline in the gypsy moth population. To support this conclusion, you should eliminate other possible explanations. (A) This is the credited response. It draws a connection between resistance to the fungus and survival (which in turn draws a connection between a lack of resistance to the fungus and death). (B) Other insect species are not the issue of the argument. (C) This draws a connection between gypsy moth population and number of predators. However, you are looking for an answer the draws a connection between poisonous fungus and the gypsy moth population. (D) To strengthen a causal relationship, you should be eliminating other possible causes. This answer choice presents other possible causes. The reduction in the availability of a food source would be a plausible explanation for a reduction in the gypsy moth population. (E) To strengthen a causal argument, you should demonstrate that the absence of the cause is accompanied by the absence of the effect. In this case, the gypsy moth population is dropping in both an area where poisonous fungus has been introduced and in an area where the fungus has not been introduced. This tends to indicate that another cause may be at work.
section 2 question 22 Question #22: Identify the flaw in the personnel director s reasoning. The personnel director concludes that to give Ms. Tours a raise would jeopardize the integrity of the firm s merit-based reward system. The director believes that a raise to Ms. Tours would communicate that one can get a raise simply by complaining enough. However, it is also true that Ms. Tours deserved raises in the past under the firm s merit-based reward system but didn t get them. Therefore, to deny Ms. Tours a raise also jeopardizes the integrity of the system on the grounds that a deserving employee is denied a raise. (A) Ms. Tours has filed a formal complaint and therefore it cannot be handled on an unofficial basis. If you find that explanation unsatisfactory, how about the fact that the distinction between official and unofficial is not the issue of the argument? (B) No, the personnel director characterizes Ms. Tours complaint as valid. (C) The argument is not about the suitability of the criteria on which the merit-based reward system is based. The argument is about whether granting a raise under these conditions in response to a formal complaint would or wouldn t jeopardize the integrity of the system. (D) Other people are not the issue of the argument. (E) This is the credited response. See the above discussion for more detail.
section 2 question 23 Question #23: How does T respond to S? S claims that 17 year olds should be allowed to vote because the government states that they are old enough for military service. The basic premise is that if you are old enough to fight, you are old enough to vote. T responds by questioning whether voting and military service are analogous and elaborates the position by outlining the sets of skills involved in each activity. (A) T s analysis undermines S s conclusion. (B) T engages in no discussion of rights. (C) No mention is ever made of the concept of obligation. (D) This is the credited response. T questions whether S is justified in drawing an analogy between fighting for one s country and voting. (E) Although T explicitly questions how S arrives at the conclusion that 17 year olds should be allowed to vote, T does not explicitly argue for the conclusion opposite to the one drawn by S. T argues against S s reasoning, not against S s conclusion.
section 2 question 24 Question #24: The author of the argument argues against the statement that the role of the Uplandian supreme court is to protect all human rights against abuses of government power. Your role is to identify the flaw in the argument attacking this point. This is a very difficult question, and your best bet is to use POE. (A) No data is mentioned and no single examples are discussed. (B) No reference is made to popular opinion. We don t know which views are or are not widely held. (C) No reference is made to who holds an opinion contrary to the opinion held by the author of the argument. (D) No discussion is made of individual members of any group. (E) This is the credited response. The author includes a premise that because there is nothing explicit about human rights in the constitution, the supreme court must resort to principles outside the explicit provisions of the constitution. It could be true that there are parts of the constitution applicable to these questions without explicitly being about human rights.
section 3 question 1 Question #1: Weaken the argument. The author concludes that the painted spider is a more successful predator than its competitors because it spins a stickier web. To weaken this argument you should look for something that the author of the argument has failed to consider. (A) Insects that do not fly are not the issue of the argument. The argument centers around the relative efficiency that painted spiders trap prey (flying insects) versus the efficiency of its competitors. (B) This would strengthen the argument and is therefore a bad answer to a weaken question. (C) The spider s venom is not the issue of the argument. (D) This is the credited response. It is a feature of the painted spider s web that makes it less likely to capture prey. (E) The advantage to the painted spider s web that the author communicates has to do with the web s stickiness, not the web s size.
section 3 question 2 Question #2: Identify the flaw. The author draws a conclusion that there is no extraterrestrial intelligent life because none has been found so far. The lack of evidence could also be used to support the argument that we are not able to locate extraterrestrial life that does indeed exist. (A) The argument centers around the search for intelligent life, not intelligence in general. Therefore, nonliving things are not the issue of the argument. (B) This is the credited response. Failing to prove something is not the same as disproving something. This is a good concept to remember. (C) There is no stated disagreement over the theory. There is a stated lack of evidence in support of the theory. (D) How is the term life vague in this argument? (It isn t.) (E) No analogy is drawn. A conclusion is drawn from the fact that there is a lack of evidence in support of a hypothesis.
section 3 question 3 Questions 3-4 Bart concludes that the solution to a certain mathematical problem is unacceptable because no one can fully comprehend how the supercomputer solved it. Anne counters Bart s argument by citing the scientific practice of accepting a certain result if that result can be replicated. Question #3: Identify Bart s assumption. Bart concludes that the solution to the mathematical problem is unacceptable. Bart s reason is that nobody fully comprehends the solution. Bart assumes a link between comprehension of the solution and the acceptability of that solution. (A) Bart s objection is not the use of the supercomputer, it s that nobody can fully comprehend how the supercomputer arrived at the solution. If we used a supercomputer to figure out 2 + 2 = 4, Bart would not have a problem with that because people comprehend addition. (B) This is the credited response. It makes an explicit link between comprehensibility and acceptability of a mathematical solution. (C) That is Anne s point. (D) No. The problem could be less complex and it would still be possible that no one could fully comprehend it. In Bart s mind, the question must be comprehensible before it is accepted. (E) Bart s conclusion has nothing to do with the fact that a supercomputer was involved. Bart s conclusion rests on the fact that the solution to the problem is not fully comprehended by anybody.