In addition to the four question types we learned in the first marking period (assumption, strengthen, weaken, inference), we'll be adding two more question types for the second marking period. These types of questions are unusual, but they will appear from time to time. With examples, they are:
Parallel Reasoning - The question will ask which one of the five answer choices is most similar to the argument being made in the stimulus. In other words, the stimulus will present an argument about a particular subject matter. The answer choices will attempt to make the same type of argument, but with different subject matter. The correct choice is the one whose reasoning most closely resembles that of the stimulus.
EXAMPLE:
If the government lowers income taxes, people will spend more of their money to buy consumer goods. This will stimulate the economy and result in higher salaries, which means the government will take in more revenue even though tax rates are lower.
Which one of the following arguments most closely resembles the reasoning in the statements above?
A. If we decrease the amount of overtime our employees work, our production costs will go down and we will make more money.
B. If we make it harder to participate in the school lunch program, people will have to spend more money on food and the farms will make more money.
C. If a movie is labeled "obscene" or "dirty," more people will want to see it and the morals of the community will be corrupted more than they would be otherwise.
D. If we give employees more paid holidays, they will become more efficient on the job and our productivity will actually increase.
E. If we give our children more spending money, they will learn to manage their money better and will realize how important it is to be careful with money.
(D) is the correct answer because its reasoning most closely resembles that of the stimulus, even though it's about a completely different subject. The argument is that a proposed course of action (lowering taxes/more paid holidays for employees) will actually have the opposite result (higher government revenue/greater productivity) than one would initially expect, and would benefit the actor. To answer a question like this, you need to put the argument in the abstract and not think about the subject matter. The key is how the author makes his argument, not what he is arguing.
(A) is incorrect because it describes an expected, predictable result, not a surprising result, of the proposed action.
(B) is incorrect because it also describes a predictable result, and describes a benefit to a third party who is not involved in the original action. In both the stimulus and choice (D), the original actor is the one who benefits from the action. Don't be fooled into looking for similar subject matter (making more money), or at only one part of the argument (in this case, the result).
(C) is incorrect because the result is a detriment, not a benefit; it is also predictable and does not directly affect the original actor.
(E) is incorrect because, like (A), it describes an expected, predictable result.
-------------------
Method of Argument - These questions will directly ask how the author is making his argument, or what kind of argument he is making. In other words, you're looking for what the author is doing, not what he's saying.
EXAMPLE:
Many people have cynically suggested that a child’s intellectual ability is determined by the socioeconomic status of his family. To test this belief, infants from poor families were removed from their homes and placed in special schools, where they were taught relatively advanced subjects from the time they were only three months old. These children had an average IQ of 110 by the time they reached school age. It would seem, therefore, that it is the degree of pre-kindergarten education the child has received, not his parents’ socioeconomic level, that determines his future intelligence.
The author's method of argument is to
A. present an alternative conclusion that explains the same evidence.
B. argue that poorer children are actually smarter than privileged ones.
C. cite specific evidence that supports his own conclusion.
D. disprove statistics presented by opponents.
E. suggest that the cause-and-effect relationship is actually the opposite of what his opponents say.
(C) is the correct answer because the author starts with something "many people" "cynically" say, then presents the results of a study in order to show that those "many people" are wrong. The author's conclusion is that education, not economics, determines a child's intelligence, and the results of the study support this conclusion.
(A) is incorrect because the evidence presented by the author is not the same evidence on which the initial belief is based. It is new evidence which the author discovered himself.
(B) is incorrect because the author is not trying to distinguish poor and privileged children, nor show that one or the other is inherently "smarter." In fact, the author is doing just the opposite. More importantly, though, this would be an example of a conclusion, not a method; i.e., something the author would be saying, not doing. (Of course, it's not what the author is saying, so it's wrong on both counts.)
(D) is incorrect because as far as we know, the author's opponents have not presented any statistics at all. The fact that their belief is called "cynical" suggests that they have no facts to back it up.
(E) is incorrect because it's simply wrong. The author's opponents say that low economic status causes low intelligence; the author is not arguing that low intelligence causes low economic status. (The same applies if you substitute "high" for "low".) The author's argument is that economic status and intelligence do not correlate.
--------
The first 20 homeworks have been added together as one grade for marking period 1. Marking period 2, and the second set of homeworks, will begin with Homework #21.
