Logical Reasoning

666 questions

Question 181Question →

Conservator: Art historians frequently assert that identifying smalt—a cobalt-infused potassium glass pigment—in a Renaissance oil painting definitively establishes that the artwork was executed in northern Europe, where smalt manufacture was concentrated. These scholars assume that Italian workshops exclusively used natural ultramarine and azurite. However, historical customs ledgers reveal that Venetian maritime merchants imported substantial consignments of powdered smalt directly from Flemish producers as early as the late fifteenth century, making the pigment readily accessible to Italian painters, who regularly used it as an economical substitute in underpaintings. Thus, the presence of smalt in a Renaissance painting does not prove that it was produced in northern Europe.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the conservator's argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The identification of smalt in a Renaissance painting is insufficient to establish that the painting was created in northern Europe.

Answer

The statement expressing that the identification of smalt in a Renaissance painting is insufficient to establish that the painting was created in northern Europe is the correct answer.
The correct answer accurately states the conservator's ultimate conclusion: the presence of smalt does not demonstrate northern European provenance. The argument establishes that because Italian painters also had access to smalt via Venetian imports, finding smalt fails to serve as conclusive proof of a northern European origin.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Isolate the opposing viewpoint and the author's counter-position.
The author introduces a prevailing view held by art historians (smalt definitively proves northern European provenance) and counters it.
Main Point questions often center on an author refuting an initial opposing claim.
2
Analyze the structural role of the supporting evidence and intermediate inferences.
The Venetian import records serve as a premise, which supports the intermediate conclusion that Italian painters had access to and used smalt.
Distinguishing subsidiary conclusions from the main conclusion prevents falling into structural distractor traps.
3
Identify the overarching claim that receives support from all other statements in the argument.
Because Italian painters also used smalt, detecting smalt cannot definitively prove a northern European origin.
The final sentence expresses the ultimate deductive conclusion supported by the entire chain of reasoning.

Key Concept

Distinguishing the main conclusion from supporting premises, opposing viewpoints, and intermediate conclusions.
Question 182Question →

Consider the following argument:

Urban policy analyst: Municipalities frequently implement peak-period congestion surcharges on arterial corridors under the belief that tolling will directly curtail net metropolitan emissions. However, commuters attempting to avoid high tolls divert to unmonitored residential streets. This diversion creates extended stop-and-go driving conditions that significantly elevate fuel consumption per mile. Consequently, arterial congestion surcharges fail to produce a net reduction in citywide vehicle emissions. Transportation departments should therefore refrain from designating peak-period arterial surcharges as their primary clean-air measure.

Based on the analyst's argument, arrange the following claims in order of their logical progression, starting from the initial behavioral premise, moving through the intermediate reasoning, and culminating in the argument's main conclusion.

Drag items to arrange them in the correct order

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The correct logical sequence begins with the behavioral premise regarding commuter route diversion, followed by the causal premise explaining elevated fuel consumption, leading to the intermediate conclusion that surcharges fail to lower citywide emissions, and finishing with the ultimate main conclusion that transportation departments should not adopt such surcharges as their primary clean-air policy.
The argument builds a sequential logical chain: first, it establishes that commuters divert to secondary streets (initial behavioral premise); second, it explains that this diversion increases fuel consumption via stop-and-go driving (causal premise); third, from these two points it infers that arterial surcharges do not reduce net emissions (intermediate conclusion); and finally, it utilizes this intermediate finding to support its ultimate normative recommendation that agencies should not make surcharges their primary clean-air policy (main conclusion).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the foundational behavioral and physical premises in the stimulus.
The initial premise establishes that commuters divert onto residential streets, and the linked causal premise establishes that this diversion increases per-mile fuel consumption.
Foundational premises provide the raw factual observations upon which the author builds subsequent claims.
2
Locate the intermediate (subsidiary) conclusion.
The claim that arterial surcharges fail to produce a net reduction in citywide vehicle emissions is supported by the premises but is not the final stopping point of the author's argument.
An intermediate conclusion receives support from basic premises and in turn acts as evidence for a broader conclusion.
3
Determine the overarching main conclusion of the argument.
The prescriptive statement that transportation departments should refrain from designating peak-period arterial surcharges as their primary clean-air measure represents the ultimate takeaway.
The main conclusion is the final destination of the argument, receiving support from the intermediate conclusion without being used to support any further claim.

Key Concept

Distinguishing Foundational Premises, Subsidiary Conclusions, and the Ultimate Main Conclusion
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Question 183Question →

Botanist: Mycorrhizal fungi networks (MFNs) connect the root systems of various plants in a forest environment. In a recent five-year study of a mature Douglas fir forest, isotopic carbon tracing revealed that significant amounts of carbon moved continuously from mature, canopy-dominant Douglas firs to nearby shaded Douglas fir seedlings via these MFNs. Furthermore, the seedlings connected to the MFN exhibited a 30 percent higher survival rate than similarly shaded seedlings that were isolated from the fungal network. Therefore, it is clear that mature trees actively allocate resources through MFNs specifically to ensure the survival of their own species' offspring in light-limited environments.

Which of the following statements, if true, most strongly weaken the botanist's argument? (Select all that apply)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Studies on mixed-species forests indicate that carbon transferred through MFNs flows from canopy-dominant trees to nearby shaded seedlings of entirely different plant species at the same volume and rate.; The fungi comprising the network actively extract carbon from mature trees to fuel their own subterranean expansion, with seedlings merely passively absorbing excess carbon that the fungi excrete into the surrounding soil.

Answer

The correct statements are the one indicating carbon flows to different species at the same rate, and the one indicating fungi actively extract the carbon while seedlings passively absorb it.
The conclusion makes two distinct causal claims based on the observed correlation: that the mature trees 'actively allocate' the resources, and that they do this 'specifically to ensure the survival of their own species'. The correct answers introduce new evidence that dismantles both claims. The statement about mixed-species forests shows that the transfer is indiscriminate, destroying the 'own species' motive. The statement about fungal extraction shows that the fungi, not the trees, are driving the mechanism, destroying the 'actively allocate' claim.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structure of the argument.
Premises: Carbon moves from mature trees to shaded seedlings via MFNs. Connected seedlings survive 30% more. Conclusion: Mature trees actively allocate resources specifically to ensure their own species' survival.
Deconstructing the argument into premises and conclusion is necessary to identify the logical gap.
2
Identify the logical gaps and assumptions.
The author assumes that the transfer of carbon implies 'active allocation' by the tree (rather than passive diffusion or fungal action) and assumes the intent is 'specifically to ensure the survival of their own species'.
Finding assumptions reveals the vulnerabilities where the argument can be weakened.
3
Evaluate the options for statements that attack these specific assumptions.
One correct choice attacks the 'own species' assumption by showing cross-species transfer. The other correct choice attacks the 'active allocation' assumption by showing the fungi are the active agents.
Correct weaken answers often introduce new information that severs the causal link assumed by the author.

Key Concept

Identifying alternative explanations and severing assumed causal relationships in a correlation.
Estimated Time:2m 30s
Question 184Question →

Read the argument and complete the missing premise that makes the conclusion follow logically with absolute deductive certainty.

Fill in the blanks below

Biochemist: Any metabolic enzyme that requires zinc cofactor binding is structurally destabilized at temperatures exceeding 45°C. The newly isolated bacterial protease P-329 remains structurally stable at 50°C. Therefore, P-329 cannot catalyze peptide bond hydrolysis under physiological conditions.

The biochemist's conclusion follows logically if it is assumed that any metabolic enzyme that catalyzes peptide bond hydrolysis under physiological conditions
.
Show answer & explanation

Answer

requires zinc cofactor binding
The premises establish that protease P-329 remains stable at 50°C, which by contrapositive of the first premise proves that P-329 does not require zinc cofactor binding. The conclusion asserts that P-329 cannot catalyze peptide bond hydrolysis under physiological conditions. For this conclusion to follow necessarily, lacking zinc cofactor binding must be sufficient to prevent catalytic activity, meaning that requiring zinc cofactor binding is a necessary requirement for catalysis. Therefore, assuming that any enzyme that catalyzes peptide bond hydrolysis requires zinc cofactor binding enables the valid deductive inference: Catalyzes Hydrolysis -> Requires Zinc -> Destabilized >45°C. Since P-329 is stable at 50°C, it cannot require zinc, and thus cannot catalyze hydrolysis.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze and diagram the explicit premises given in the stimulus.
Premise 1: Requires zinc cofactor binding -> Destabilized above 45°C. Contrapositive: Stable at or above 45°C -> Does not require zinc cofactor binding. Premise 2: P-329 is stable at 50°C. Combining these yields the intermediate deduction: P-329 does not require zinc cofactor binding.
Establishing what is strictly proven by the premises reveals the exact starting point of the inferential gap.
2
Identify the conclusion and isolate the logical gap.
Conclusion: P-329 cannot catalyze peptide bond hydrolysis under physiological conditions. The intermediate deduction establishes that P-329 lacks zinc cofactor binding, but the argument concludes that P-329 lacks the ability to catalyze peptide bond hydrolysis.
A sufficient assumption must provide a universal bridge connecting the established condition (does not require zinc cofactor binding) to the final conclusion (cannot catalyze peptide bond hydrolysis).
3
Construct the missing bridge premise in the required conditional format.
To deduce that lacking zinc cofactor binding guarantees inability to catalyze hydrolysis, we need: No zinc cofactor binding -> Cannot catalyze hydrolysis. The contrapositive of this bridge is: Catalyzes peptide bond hydrolysis -> Requires zinc cofactor binding.
The stem frames the assumption starting with 'any metabolic enzyme that catalyzes peptide bond hydrolysis under physiological conditions...', requiring the completion 'requires zinc cofactor binding' to complete the valid chain.

Key Concept

Sufficient Assumption Deductive Bridging
Question 185Question →

Consider the four argumentative excerpts below, each of which contains a distinct reasoning error. Match each flawed argument with the abstract description that most accurately characterizes its central vulnerability.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

City Planner: Any municipality that successfully revitalizes its downtown commercial core must first establish dedicated pedestrian-only corridors. Because Millfield recently completed the conversion of its main retail avenue into a pedestrian corridor, we can be certain that downtown Millfield will achieve full economic revitalization.
Cognitive Scientist: The sudden surge in worker productivity following the laboratory redesign must be attributable either to the upgraded full-spectrum lighting or to the installation of ergonomic standing desks. Because environmental monitors confirmed that the lighting intensity remained unchanged, the ergonomic desks alone must have generated the productivity gain.
Materials Engineer: Every composite polymer bracket utilized in the prototype airframe possesses exceptional thermal resistance and remains structurally sound at temperatures exceeding 800 degrees Celsius. Therefore, the assembled prototype airframe as an entire unit will inevitably withstand operational temperatures above 800 degrees Celsius.
Sociologist: A comprehensive longitudinal survey established that adults who regularly participate in competitive amateur team sports report significantly lower rates of chronic insomnia than adults who do not. Clearly, participating in competitive team athletics actively prevents sleep disturbances in adults.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The correct matches pair the City Planner with confusing a necessary condition for a sufficient one, the Cognitive Scientist with assuming only two explanations exist, the Materials Engineer with inferring a property of the whole from its parts, and the Sociologist with inferring causation from correlation.
Each argument maps directly to an established structural flaw in informal and formal logic: the City Planner confuses a necessary condition for a sufficient one; the Cognitive Scientist commits a false dilemma by assuming an exhaustive binary choice; the Materials Engineer commits a composition flaw moving from individual parts to the whole entity; and the Sociologist infers causation directly from correlation without ruling out alternative explanations.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the formal logic in the City Planner's statement
The argument treats the establishment of pedestrian zones as a requirement for revitalization, yet concludes that establishing them guarantees revitalization.
Identifying the modal indicator 'must first' establishes a necessary condition, which the conclusion invalidly treats as sufficient.
2
Evaluate the exclusivity assumption in the Cognitive Scientist's statement
The argument restricts potential explanations strictly to lighting or desks with no support, then eliminates one to prove the other.
This matches the classic false dilemma / exhaustive alternatives flaw.
3
Examine the compositional shift in the Materials Engineer's argument
The premise attributes high thermal tolerance to individual brackets; the conclusion transfers this property directly to the complete airframe.
Properties of components do not automatically aggregate to the whole structure (fallacy of composition).
4
Assess the empirical claim in the Sociologist's argument
A survey finding an inverse correlation between sports participation and insomnia is used to conclude that sports cause the reduction in insomnia.
Correlation alone does not establish direction of causation or eliminate confounding variables.

Key Concept

Identifying recurring logical fallacies: necessary versus sufficient confusion, false dilemma, fallacy of composition, and correlation versus causation.
Question 186Question →

In hydrothermal vent ecosystems, every organism that produces nutrients without sunlight utilizes chemosynthetic bacteria. All chemosynthetic bacteria active at these vents generate carbohydrates by metabolizing either dissolved sulfides or methane, and any chemosynthetic bacterium that metabolizes dissolved sulfides inevitably yields sulfate byproducts. Giant tubeworms thriving at hydrothermal vents depend exclusively on symbiotic bacteria that metabolize dissolved sulfides.

If the statements above are true, which one of the following must also be true?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The symbiotic bacteria utilized by giant tubeworms at hydrothermal vents yield sulfate byproducts.

Answer

The symbiotic bacteria utilized by giant tubeworms at hydrothermal vents yield sulfate byproducts.
The correct response strictly follows by combining two stated premises: giant tubeworms depend on bacteria that metabolize dissolved sulfides, and any chemosynthetic bacterium metabolizing dissolved sulfides inevitably produces sulfate byproducts.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the premises regarding giant tubeworms and their metabolic partners.
Giant tubeworms depend exclusively on symbiotic bacteria that metabolize dissolved sulfides.
Establishing the specific metabolic pathway utilized by tubeworm symbionts isolates the applicable rule.
2
Connect the specific finding to the general conditional rule regarding sulfide metabolism.
Any chemosynthetic bacterium metabolizing dissolved sulfides yields sulfate byproducts.
Applying the universal rule to the specific subset yields a direct deductive consequence.
3
Synthesize the premises to draw the deductive conclusion.
Because tubeworm symbionts metabolize dissolved sulfides, they necessarily yield sulfate byproducts.
This conclusion is strictly entailed by the premises without requiring outside assumptions.

Key Concept

Deductive Conditional Synthesis and Quantifier Tracking
Estimated Time:1m 20s
Question 187Question →

To control the silver-winged locust, agricultural researchers introduced a parasitic wasp that preys exclusively on locust larvae. Comprehensive field data confirm that the wasps are highly effective, consistently reducing the total number of locust larvae in the region by 60 percent each spring. Yet, over the five years since the wasps were introduced, the total adult population of silver-winged locusts recorded during the summer mating season has consistently doubled compared to the years immediately preceding the intervention, even though the locusts' habitat size, available food supply, and other predator populations have remained strictly constant.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy described above?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Before the wasps were introduced, the extreme density of the larval population caused severe competition for a scarce nutrient, resulting in the starvation of nearly all larvae just before they reached adulthood.

Answer

The correct answer states that before the wasps were introduced, extreme larval density caused severe competition for a scarce nutrient, starving nearly all larvae before adulthood.
The correct answer resolves the paradox by identifying a compensatory mechanism. If the initial larval population was so massive that nearly all of them died from competition before reaching adulthood, reducing that initial population by 60 percent would drastically reduce competition. Since the total food supply remained constant, this allows a much higher absolute number of the remaining larvae to survive to adulthood, perfectly explaining how a 60 percent reduction in larvae leads to a 200 percent increase in adults.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the two seemingly contradictory facts presented in the stimulus.
Fact 1: Parasitic wasps consistently reduce the total locust larvae population by 60 percent. Fact 2: The adult locust population has nevertheless doubled without any increase in food supply or habitat.
A 'Resolve the Paradox' question requires pinpointing exactly what makes the situation confusing before evaluating the answer choices.
2
Determine what a correct answer must accomplish.
The correct answer must explain how a massive reduction in the initial stage of a population (larvae) can directly lead to a massive increase in the final stage of that same population (adults), without contradicting the 60 percent reduction rate.
The correct answer must bridge the two premises, allowing both to be simultaneously true in the real world.
3
Evaluate the answer choices against the required function.
The option describing severe competition for a scarce nutrient explains the discrepancy. If the wasps eliminate 60 percent of the larvae, the remaining 40 percent face drastically reduced competition, allowing a much higher absolute number of individuals to secure the nutrients needed to survive to adulthood.
This provides the missing causal link (alleviation of density-dependent mortality) that logically reconciles the reduction in larvae with the increase in adults.

Key Concept

Resolve the Paradox
Question 188Question →

Paleoclimatologist: Speleothems (mineral deposits such as stalagmites) in a highland cavern preserve distinct annual layers with oxygen isotope ratios (δ18O\delta^{18}\text{O}) that fluctuate in response to rainfall. Analysis of a stalagmite spanning the eleventh to thirteenth centuries reveals a pronounced forty-year interval of highly enriched δ18O\delta^{18}\text{O} values, indicative of diminished local precipitation. Because historical agricultural annals from the adjacent low-lying river valley record widespread crop failures and village abandonment during this identical forty-year window, researchers conclude that a prolonged regional drought caused the abandonment of these agrarian settlements.

Statement: The finding that drought-sensitive teak trees throughout the adjacent river valley exhibited an unprecedented suppression in annual growth-ring widths during the same forty-year interval logically strengthens the paleoclimatologist's conclusion.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

True. The supplementary finding provides independent corroborating evidence that the drought conditions extended into the agricultural valley, reinforcing the causal explanation for the village abandonments.
Evaluating the statement as True is correct because the paleoclimatologist's argument hinges on extrapolating a localized physical proxy (stalagmite isotope ratios from one highland cave) to an entire agricultural region. Providing independent biological evidence of growth suppression in drought-sensitive trees located throughout the farming valley validates the assumption of regional drought and eliminates the alternative hypothesis of an isolated cavern microclimate.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structure of the argument to identify premises, conclusion, and logical gaps.
Premises establish that a highland cavern stalagmite showed 40 years of reduced rainfall and that valley annals recorded crop failures at the same time. The conclusion claims that regional drought caused the village abandonments. The reasoning gap is the unproven assumption that the highland cave's rainfall deficit reflected broad regional conditions affecting the valley.
Identifying the gap between localized proxy data and a broad regional conclusion is required to evaluate potential strengtheners.
2
Assess the impact of the supplementary statement on the identified gap.
The statement demonstrates that drought-sensitive trees across the lowland valley also suffered severe growth reduction during the exact same 40-year period, confirming that drought conditions were indeed widespread in the farming zone.
A premise strengthens an argument when it provides independent corroboration or rules out alternative explanations such as localized microclimatic bias.
3
Determine the truth value of the evaluation.
Because the supplementary finding directly strengthens the conclusion by bridging the spatial and environmental gap, the statement is True.
Concludes the formal evaluation of the true/false diagnostic.

Key Concept

Strengthening a causal conclusion by providing independent proxy corroboration that eliminates localized alternative explanations.
Question 189Question →

Agricultural Economist: A newly engineered wheat strain resists the devastating "rust" fungus. In ideal conditions, this resistant strain yields 10 percent less grain per acre than traditional varieties. Nevertheless, farmers in regions susceptible to rust should transition entirely to the new strain. Adopting this strain completely eliminates the need for chemical fungicides, which currently account for nearly a third of these farmers' annual operating costs. Therefore, by making this transition, these farmers will maximize their average net income over the next decade.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the agricultural economist's argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The chemical fungicides conventionally used to prevent rust also provide essential protection against several other yield-destroying pests to which the new wheat strain is highly vulnerable.

Answer

The option stating that the chemical fungicides provide essential protection against other yield-destroying pests to which the new strain is vulnerable.
The economist bases the conclusion on a straightforward cost-benefit calculation: saving nearly a third of operating costs will more than make up for a 10 percent drop in ideal yield. The correct answer shatters this calculation by showing that eliminating the fungicide has a massive unintended consequence. Because the fungicide also protects against other pests, and the new wheat is highly vulnerable to them, removing the chemical will result in catastrophic yield losses far beyond 10 percent, effectively preventing the farmers from maximizing their net income.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion and premises of the argument.
Conclusion: Transitioning to the new wheat strain will maximize farmers' average net income. Premises: The strain yields 10% less in ideal conditions, but it eliminates the need for fungicides that cost 1/3 of operating expenses.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to isolate the core logical gap.
2
Determine the unstated assumption linking the premises to the conclusion.
The argument assumes that eliminating the fungicide is a pure cost-saving measure that will not introduce new, unforeseen costs or severe yield losses beyond the stated 10% baseline.
Identifying the assumption reveals how the argument can be logically attacked.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find the one that attacks this assumption.
The correct option reveals that stopping the fungicide treatments removes protection against other pests, which will ravage the highly vulnerable new strain, thereby destroying the expected financial gains.
A valid weakener must introduce new information that severs the logical link between the proposed action and the expected outcome.

Key Concept

Causal and Conditional Reasoning in Cost-Benefit Analysis
Question 190Question →

Archivist: In order to successfully halt the microbial degradation of fourteenth-century parchment manuscripts, an archive must maintain ambient relative humidity levels strictly between thirty and thirty-five percent. The Westfall Rare Book Repository has upgraded its climate-control system to guarantee that relative humidity remains within this exact range at all times. Therefore, the repository will successfully prevent any further microbial degradation of its fourteenth-century parchment holdings.

Which of the following most accurately describes the flaw in the archivist's reasoning?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: infers that satisfying a requirement for halting microbial degradation is sufficient to guarantee that outcome

Answer

The argument infers that satisfying a requirement for halting microbial degradation is sufficient to guarantee that outcome.
The correct answer accurately identifies the structural flaw in the archivist's reasoning. The archivist sets up humidity control strictly between thirty and thirty-five percent as a necessary condition ('in order to... must maintain') to halt microbial degradation. However, the archivist then concludes that meeting this single necessary condition is sufficient to ensure that degradation is completely prevented. Meeting a necessary condition does not guarantee the outcome, because other conditions (such as temperature control or eliminating pre-existing mold spores) may also be required.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the premises and conclusion in the stimulus argument.
Premise 1: Halting microbial degradation requires (necessary condition) maintaining humidity at 30–35%. Premise 2: The repository ensures humidity remains at 30–35%. Conclusion: The repository will successfully prevent microbial degradation.
Isolating the structural components of the argument is required to uncover the logical disconnect between the evidence and the claim.
2
Analyze the inferential link between the premises and the conclusion to detect the logical vulnerability.
The author establishes a necessary condition and assumes that fulfilling this condition is sufficient to guarantee the desired outcome, overlooking other necessary factors such as ambient temperature, ultraviolet light exposure, or active biological contamination.
Detecting the gap reveals the classic error of confusing a necessary condition with a sufficient condition.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to identify the statement that accurately abstracts this reasoning error.
The statement identifying that the argument treats satisfying a requirement as sufficient to guarantee the outcome accurately captures the flaw.
The correct response must precisely describe the reasoning vulnerability without mischaracterizing the scope or creating unmentioned fallacies.

Key Concept

Confusion of Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Question 191Question →

Dr. Vance: Academic medical centers have an ethical obligation to make de-identified patient health records freely available to commercial artificial intelligence developers. The rapid training and deployment of diagnostic algorithms enabled by large-scale data access ultimately saves the greatest number of patient lives.

Dr. Mercer: While diagnostic artificial intelligence offers undeniable therapeutic promise, de-identified records frequently contain subtle combinations of demographic and clinical data that make patient re-identification feasible. Medical centers must therefore require explicit patient consent prior to releasing these records to commercial entities, regardless of potential algorithmic breakthroughs.

On the basis of their statements, Dr. Vance and Dr. Mercer are most committed to disagreeing over which one of the following?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: academic medical centers ought to require explicit patient consent before transferring de-identified patient records to commercial artificial intelligence developers.

Answer

The statement expressing that academic medical centers ought to require explicit patient consent before transferring de-identified patient records to commercial artificial intelligence developers represents the exact point of disagreement.
The correct answer accurately reflects the direct conflict between the two speakers. Dr. Vance contends that medical centers have an ethical duty to provide de-identified health data freely to commercial developers to accelerate diagnostic breakthroughs, rejecting transactional barriers. In contrast, Dr. Mercer explicitly argues that medical centers must mandate explicit patient consent prior to releasing these records due to re-identification risks, regardless of potential algorithmic breakthroughs. Because one speaker says 'no' and the other says 'yes' to requiring consent, this is the definitive point of disagreement.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first speaker's argument and commit to their stance on the core issue.
Dr. Vance argues that academic centers have an ethical obligation to make de-identified patient records freely available to commercial AI developers to maximize lives saved, thereby rejecting mandatory consent hurdles.
Identifying the first speaker's conclusion and underlying premises establishes their baseline position.
2
Analyze the second speaker's argument and determine where their stance directly conflicts.
Dr. Mercer explicitly asserts that medical centers must require explicit patient consent before transferring records to commercial entities due to re-identification risks, despite the benefits of AI.
The point at issue must be a proposition to which one speaker would say 'yes' and the other would say 'no'.
3
Apply the two-speaker test to each option to verify mutual commitment and direct opposition.
Dr. Mercer explicitly endorses requiring patient consent, whereas Dr. Vance's position that records should be made freely available directly opposes this requirement.
Distractors often describe points of agreement, unaddressed issues, or overstated claims.

Key Concept

Identifying a Point of Disagreement Using the Two-Speaker Test

Alternative Method

Use a binary grid matrix: label two columns with each speaker's name and evaluate each option with (+), (-), or (?) to quickly isolate the single proposition with opposing signs (+/-).
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Question 192Question →

Historian: In fourteenth-century southern Germany, the acute shortage of mature oak timber used for municipal bridge and cathedral construction was historically attributed by chroniclers to the Great Famine and the Black Death, which supposedly decimated the skilled labor force needed to manage and fell old-growth stands. However, recent dendroclimatological analyses of preserved river revetments indicate that between 1310 and 1345, the region experienced unprecedented multi-year periods of severe spring flooding and saturated soils. Oak taproots are uniquely vulnerable to fatal fungal root rot when submerged for extended periods, which halts trunk maturation and induces premature dieback. Therefore, climatically driven tree mortality, rather than a demographic labor collapse, was the primary cause of the structural timber deficit.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: In neighboring alpine valleys that experienced comparable population losses during the mid-fourteenth century but whose steep terrain prevented prolonged soil saturation, municipal records show that supplies of mature structural oak remained stable.

Answer

The statement demonstrating that neighboring regions with comparable population losses but no soil waterlogging maintained stable structural oak supplies most strengthens the argument.
The correct answer provides a robust comparative control group. By demonstrating that an adjacent region with the same demographic decline (the rival cause) but without soil saturation (the proposed cause) experienced no timber deficit (the effect), it shows that demographic collapse alone was insufficient to cause the shortage. This eliminates the primary competing explanation and reinforces the claim that climatically driven waterlogged soils caused the crisis.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structure of the argument and identify premises and the main conclusion.
Premises establish that severe spring flooding occurred between 1310 and 1345, and that oak taproots suffer lethal fungal rot in waterlogged soil. The conclusion asserts that climate-driven tree mortality, rather than labor demographic collapse from famine and plague, was the primary cause of the oak deficit.
Isolating the conclusion allows us to pinpoint the core causal competition between climatically driven tree mortality and labor collapse.
2
Identify the reasoning gap and formulate a strengthening strategy.
The author must rule out the plausible rival hypothesis (labor shortages) or provide comparative evidence showing that the presence of waterlogging, rather than the presence of demographic collapse, correlates directly with the shortage.
In causal arguments that dismiss an established alternative explanation, demonstrating that the alternative explanation alone does not produce the effect strongly validates the proposed cause.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to locate the statement that best bridges this gap.
The control scenario showing that alpine valleys with identical demographic loss but well-drained soils experienced no timber shortage effectively isolates soil saturation as the necessary factor for the deficit, ruling out labor loss as the primary cause.
This comparative control group eliminates the primary competing explanation.

Key Concept

Causal strengthening through isolation of variables and control group comparison
Estimated Time:1m 45s
Question 193Question →

Each of the arguments below arrives at a causal conclusion based on an observed correlation or trend. Match each argument with the evidentiary statement that most strongly strengthens its conclusion by ruling out a key rival hypothesis.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Paleoclimatologists detected a sharp spike in micro-charcoal particles in Andean ice cores dating to the late sixth century. They concluded that widespread agricultural burning by the Tiwanaku civilization caused this atmospheric particulate peak.
Marine biologists recorded a steady rise in the pitch and volume of beluga whale contact calls in a busy shipping estuary over five years. They concluded that the whales altered their vocal acoustics specifically to overcome masking noise from commercial ships.
Corporate auditors using newly introduced automated risk-flagging software approved significantly more non-compliant transactions during the final two hours of their shifts than during early hours. Researchers concluded that interaction with the software accelerated cognitive fatigue.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

Argument 1 (Tiwanaku agricultural burning) matches the regional lake sediment finding ruling out natural wildfires; Argument 2 (Beluga whale acoustic shifts) matches the isolated fjord control group showing unchanged vocal patterns; Argument 3 (Auditor software fatigue) matches the manual review control group showing no late-shift error escalation.
Each correct pairing matches an argument with an empirical finding that eliminates an unstated confounding factor. For the Tiwanaku argument, ruling out natural wildfires and regional droughts establishes anthropogenic burning as the probable source of the micro-charcoal. For the beluga whale argument, observing stable vocal patterns in an unexposed control population confirms that shipping noise—rather than aging or water conditions—drove the acoustic adaptation. For the audit software argument, demonstrating that manual reviewers on identical shifts did not experience late-shift accuracy decline isolates the software tool as the driver of performance degradation.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze each argument's causal conclusion and identify its primary unstated gap or rival explanation.
Identified three distinct gaps: (1) charcoal could stem from natural wildfires; (2) vocal shifts could stem from demographic or environmental factors; (3) auditor errors could stem from standard end-of-shift tiredness independent of software.
Strengthening a causal claim requires finding evidence that rules out plausible alternative causes or provides a parallel control condition.
2
Evaluate the evidentiary statements to determine which finding eliminates each argument's specific alternative cause.
The sediment data eliminates the natural wildfire explanation for Argument 1; the vessel-free fjord population isolates shipping noise for Argument 2; the manual auditing baseline isolates the software interface for Argument 3.
Each correct match provides a valid control or eliminates a confounding variable directly tied to the corresponding argument.
3
Verify that no matched evidentiary statement introduces irrelevant scope or weakens any paired conclusion.
Each pair establishes a robust, non-overlapping causal strengthener.
Ensures full logical consistency across all pairs.

Key Concept

Strengthening Causal Claims via Control Groups and Alternative Hypothesis Elimination
Question 194Question →

Cognitive Neuroscientist: During slow-wave sleep, hippocampal neural replay is observed, wherein patterns of brain activity from daytime maze-learning tasks are rapidly reactivated. When researchers pharmacologically suppressed this replay in laboratory rodents without disrupting the overall duration or depth of their slow-wave sleep, the rodents performed significantly worse on spatial recall tests the following day compared to control rodents whose replay activity was uninhibited. Therefore, hippocampal neural replay during slow-wave sleep is essential for the consolidation of spatial memories.

Which of the following are assumptions on which the cognitive neuroscientist's argument depends? (Select all that apply.)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The pharmacological substance administered to the experimental rodents did not degrade their spatial recall performance through some physiological effect other than the suppression of replay.; The disparity in spatial recall between the experimental and control rodents was not entirely attributable to pre-existing differences in their baseline navigational capabilities.

Answer

The argument depends on the assumptions that the pharmacological agent did not cause the performance deficit through an unrelated mechanism and that the difference between the groups was not entirely due to pre-existing baseline navigation differences.
Both required statements protect the causal connection between replay suppression and memory deficit. If the pharmacological intervention impaired recall through an unrelated physiological mechanism, or if the experimental and control groups differed completely in baseline ability prior to the test, the observed recall deficit cannot be attributed to the lack of replay during sleep. Negating either statement destroys the conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the core argument structure
Premises: Suppressing hippocampal replay during slow-wave sleep without altering sleep duration/depth led to worse next-day recall in rodents compared to uninhibited controls. Conclusion: Hippocampal replay during slow-wave sleep is essential (necessary) for spatial memory consolidation.
Identifying the exact premises and conclusion isolates the gap between the experimental observation and the causal claim.
2
Apply the Negation Test to potential Defender assumptions
Negating the statement about side effects shows that if the drug caused deficits via an unrelated pathway, the conclusion collapses. Negating the statement about pre-existing differences shows that if baseline disparities explained the entire performance gap, the experimental intervention was not the cause.
A necessary assumption must fatally undermine the conclusion when logically negated.
3
Evaluate and eliminate distractors
Claims asserting sufficiency, extreme universal superiority, or rigid individual comparative rankings are not strictly required for the author's necessary relationship to hold.
Assumptions that go beyond what is logically required are invalid for necessary assumption tasks.

Key Concept

Identifying necessary foundational assumptions (both supporter bridges and defender exclusions) required to validate a causal conclusion drawn from an experimental study.
Question 195Question →

To reduce fraudulent warranty claims on its premium kitchen appliances, a manufacturer began requiring customers to upload a digital copy of their original purchase receipt through an online portal before submitting a claim. Following the introduction of this portal, the total number of approved, legitimate warranty claims increased by nearly thirty percent, even though overall sales of the appliances remained constant and there was no increase in the rate of manufacturing defects. Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain the increase in legitimate warranty claims?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Prior to the introduction of the digital portal, filing a claim required consumers to mail physical paper receipts and packaging to a remote inspection facility, a cumbersome process that had deterred many consumers with defective units from seeking repairs.

Answer

The statement explaining that filing claims previously required consumers to mail physical paper receipts and packaging to a remote inspection facility, which had deterred many consumers with defective units from seeking repairs.
The correct response resolves the paradox by identifying a baseline suppression factor in the previous procedure. If submitting warranty claims previously required an onerous physical mailing process that deterred eligible owners of defective machines from claiming repairs, introducing a convenient online portal would naturally allow those previously abandoned legitimate claims to be filed, causing total approved valid claims to rise by thirty percent even with flat sales and unchanged defect rates.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Isolate the two conflicting premises in the stimulus
Premise 1: A manufacturer added a digital receipt upload requirement to stop fraud. Premise 2: Approved legitimate warranty claims rose by nearly 30%, despite steady sales and unchanged defect rates.
Resolving a paradox requires clearly defining the exact tension between the established facts.
2
Formulate the necessary bridging mechanism
The correct answer must explain how valid claims could surge without an increase in appliance sales or defective units.
The resolution must allow both premises to be true simultaneously without contradicting either fact.
3
Evaluate the choices for a mechanism that accounts for the increase in valid claims
The option showing that the previous paper-mailing system deterred valid claims accounts for the sudden realization of previously unfiled, legitimate claims once the easier portal was implemented.
Lowering friction captures latent demand from customers who previously suffered defects in silence.

Key Concept

Reconciling an apparent discrepancy by identifying a change in procedural friction that unlocked unexercised claims
Question 196Question →

Acoustics Consultant: In order for a newly constructed concert hall to achieve premier acoustic resonance, the ceiling must incorporate specialized curved timber diffusers. The newly completed Harpswell Auditorium was constructed with specialized curved timber diffusers throughout its main hall ceiling. Therefore, the Harpswell Auditorium is guaranteed to achieve premier acoustic resonance.

The acoustics consultant's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

Show answer & explanation

Answer: infers that satisfying a necessary prerequisite for achieving an outcome is sufficient to guarantee that outcome

Answer

The argument is flawed because it infers that satisfying a necessary prerequisite for achieving an outcome is sufficient to guarantee that outcome.
The consultant establishes that having specialized curved timber diffusers is a necessary condition ('in order for... must incorporate') for premier acoustic resonance. However, the conclusion infers that meeting this necessary condition is sufficient to guarantee the result. The option stating that the argument infers that satisfying a necessary prerequisite for achieving an outcome is sufficient to guarantee that outcome precisely captures this error.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structure and conditional relationships in the premises
The phrase 'in order for X, Y must occur' introduces a necessary condition: Premier Acoustic Resonance implies Specialized Curved Timber Diffusers.
Identifying the formal logic relationships in the premises is required to evaluate whether the conclusion follows validly.
2
Examine the application to the specific case and the stated conclusion
The premise affirms that Harpswell Auditorium has the required diffusers, and the conclusion claims that premier acoustic resonance is guaranteed.
This shows that the argument affirms the necessary condition to improperly deduce the sufficient condition.
3
Match the identified vulnerability to the corresponding flaw description
The core flaw is treating a required (necessary) condition as a sufficient guarantee.
Accurately abstracting the error identifies the precise description of the reasoning vulnerability.

Key Concept

Conditional Reasoning Flaw: Mistaken Reversal / Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Question 197Question →

Agricultural Scientist: In a field trial across thirty commercial apple orchards, trees treated with a foliar spray containing live *Bacillus* bacteria produced fruit with significantly lower rates of bitter rot fungal infection than untreated trees did. Because chemical analyses revealed that the spray did not alter the thickness or acidity of the apple skin, the scientist concluded that the *Bacillus* bacteria themselves actively suppress the germination of bitter rot fungal spores on the fruit's surface.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the agricultural scientist's argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Trees sprayed with a sterile solution identical to the foliar spray in every respect except lacking live *Bacillus* bacteria experienced rates of bitter rot infection comparable to those of untreated trees.

Answer

The statement showing that trees sprayed with a sterile solution containing all spray ingredients except the live bacteria suffered infection rates comparable to untreated trees.
The argument concludes that live *Bacillus* bacteria were the direct cause of the lower infection rates. A major vulnerability of this inference is that the liquid spray itself or other inactive carrier ingredients might have washed away spores or created a hostile environment. By showing that an identical spray without live bacteria yields infection rates no better than no treatment at all, the correct choice acts as a negative control, ruling out the carrier solution as an alternative cause and strongly reinforcing the causal role of the bacteria.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.
Premise: Apple trees sprayed with a bacterial mixture had lower bitter rot infection rates than untreated trees, without changes to apple skin thickness or acidity. Conclusion: The live bacteria themselves actively suppress fungal spore germination.
Clarifying the boundary between observed evidence and the causal claim reveals the reasoning gap.
2
Isolate the unstated assumption and potential alternative explanations.
The author assumes that no other element of the foliar spray application (such as the liquid carrier, surfactant, or physical moisture) caused the reduction in fungal infection.
Causal conclusions in experimental settings require establishing that the proposed independent variable, rather than confounding treatment factors, generated the outcome.
3
Evaluate the answer choices for information that eliminates confounding variables or substantiates the causal link.
Demonstrating that an identical spray lacking only the bacteria produces no therapeutic effect confirms that the bacteria are necessary for the observed protection.
Ruling out a potential alternative cause directly strengthens a causal argument.

Key Concept

Causal strengthening via ruling out confounding variables and establishing negative controls
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Question 198Question →

Each of the arguments below relies on an implicit foundational assumption essential to establishing its conclusion. Match each argument on the left with the underlying necessary assumption on the right on which it strictly depends.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Archaeologist: Excavations at an inland cave shelter yielded obsidian projectile points with distinctive impact wear. Because obsidian does not naturally occur anywhere within the shelter's river valley, the cave's inhabitants must have acquired these points through long-distance trade networks.
Ecologist: A coastal kelp forest suffered severe canopy loss immediately following a sharp decline in local sea otter numbers. Because sea otters prey heavily on sea urchins, which feed on kelp holdfasts, the reduction in otter predation was the cause of the kelp canopy loss.
Economist: When a luxury watchmaker raised the price of its flagship chronograph by 20 percent, quarterly unit sales rose by 15 percent. Therefore, consumers purchased more units because they perceived the higher price as an indicator of superior prestige.
Art Conservator: Spectroscopic analysis of a Renaissance fresco detected synthetic barium sulfate beneath the apse pigments. Because synthetic barium sulfate was not produced before the nineteenth century, the fresco must be a modern forgery rather than an authentic Renaissance work.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

Each argument pairs with the defender assumption that rules out an alternative explanation fatal to its conclusion: the obsidian argument pairs with the assumption that inhabitants did not travel to sources directly; the kelp forest argument pairs with the assumption that a third environmental variable did not cause both events; the chronograph argument pairs with the assumption that territory expansion was not solely responsible for sales gains; and the fresco argument pairs with the assumption that the nineteenth-century compound was not added during a later restoration.
Each correct pairing provides an unstated defender assumption that eliminates an alternative explanation capable of disproving the specific conclusion: direct procurement disproves trade dependency; a shared third cause disproves direct ecological causality; retail expansion disproves consumer price perception; and historic restoration disproves total modern forgery.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Isolate the conclusion and primary evidence for each argument passage on the left.
Identified four specific claims: trade was necessary for obsidian, otter reduction caused kelp loss, price increase stimulated demand via prestige signaling, and modern pigment presence proves complete forgery.
A necessary assumption must bridge the logical gap between the stated premises and the conclusion or defend against a potential defeater.
2
Apply the Negation Technique to candidate assumptions on the right.
Negating each matched assumption introduces an alternative explanation that completely destroys the validity of the author's respective conclusion.
If an argument can survive the logical negation of a statement, that statement is not a necessary assumption.
3
Match each passage to its required unstated presupposition.
The trade argument matches direct travel exclusion; the ecological causal argument matches confounding variable exclusion; the pricing argument matches retail expansion exclusion; and the forgery argument matches later restoration exclusion.
Ensures complete one-to-one logical alignment across all four independent scenarios.

Key Concept

A necessary assumption is an unstated premise required for an argument's conclusion to hold. Under the Negation Test, negating a truly necessary assumption will fatally undermine the author's conclusion.
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Question 199Question →

Each of the following arguments draws a causal or explanatory conclusion from empirical observations. Match each argument with the supplementary finding that most strengthens its conclusion.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Paleoclimatologist: Ice core strata from an Antarctic dome reveal an abrupt surge in atmospheric methane concentrations coinciding with a rapid deglacial warming episode 14,700 years ago. Because isotopic examination of this trapped gas reveals a depleted carbon-14 profile characteristic of biogenic decomposition in tropical wetlands rather than marine methane hydrates, wetland methane release must have been the primary catalyst that initiated the warming episode.
Behavioral Economist: In a municipal workplace study, workers automatically enrolled in emergency savings accounts accumulated three times more savings over twelve months than workers who were required to actively opt in, even though both groups completed the same mandatory financial literacy curriculum. Because both cohorts scored identically on post-curriculum comprehension assessments, the higher accumulation among automatically enrolled workers must be attributable entirely to behavioral inertia rather than disparities in financial literacy.
Plant Biologist: *Arenaria aggregata*, a cushion plant inhabiting exposed subalpine ridgelines, produces leaf cuticles with forty percent greater tensile strength than those of closely related lowland taxa. Because gale-force winds are frequent along these ridgelines whereas herbivorous insect populations are virtually nonexistent at these elevations, this reinforced cuticle must have evolved primarily to prevent mechanical damage from wind rather than to resist herbivory.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The paleoclimatologist's argument matches with the chronological finding placing the methane surge before the warming; the behavioral economist's argument matches with the finding confirming opt-in workers did not save more in external accounts; and the plant biologist's argument matches with the experimental evidence showing unreinforced plants suffer reproductive failure under high winds.
Each matched pair correctly resolves the distinct inferential vulnerability of the stimulus. For the paleoclimatological claim, demonstrating that the methane surge preceded warming by decades validates the causal direction and rules out reverse causality. For the economic study, auditing external accounts eliminates the primary alternative explanation that opt-in workers saved outside the workplace program. For the botanical claim, demonstrating that wind stress inflicts structural damage and fitness loss on unreinforced plants directly substantiates the claim that the trait evolved as an adaptation to mechanical wind forces.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the paleoclimatologist's argument to locate the core vulnerability in the causal claim.
The argument concludes that wetland methane caused the deglacial warming episode based on isotopic signature. The unstated gap is the temporal order of cause and effect—whether the methane surge initiated warming or was triggered by pre-existing warming.
Strengthening a causal initiation claim requires establishing that the purported cause preceded the effect.
2
Analyze the behavioral economist's argument to identify unaddressed alternative hypotheses.
The conclusion claims that differences in program savings were caused entirely by enrollment inertia. The unaddressed possibility is that opt-in workers saved equivalent amounts in outside accounts.
Strengthening an attribution of an observed disparity to a specific mechanism requires ruling out competing behavioral substitutions.
3
Analyze the plant biologist's argument to assess the functional evolutionary claim.
The conclusion asserts that cuticular tensile strength is an adaptation to wind stress. The gap is whether ambient wind forces actually impose selection pressure against unreinforced leaves.
Strengthening an evolutionary adaptation argument requires demonstrating that the absence of the trait reduces fitness under the specified environmental stressor.
4
Match each argument with its corresponding uniquely supportive evidentiary statement.
The methane argument pairs with the stratigraphic sequence dating; the workplace savings argument pairs with the external account audit; the alpine plant argument pairs with the simulated wind stress experiment on lowland relatives.
Each statement directly resolves the primary vulnerability of its respective argument without providing relevant support to the other scenarios.

Key Concept

Strengthening causal and explanatory arguments through chronological validation, elimination of competing explanations, and demonstration of selective mechanisms
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 200Question →

Philosopher A: We are epistemically justified in relying on our memory beliefs only because they systematically cohere with our present sensory perceptions and the reliable testimony of others. Because the faculty of memory is intrinsically fallible, a memory belief isolated from this network of external corroboration lacks any epistemic warrant.

Philosopher B: It is undeniable that memory is an intrinsically fallible faculty. However, demanding external corroboration to justify every memory belief precipitates an infinite regress, since interpreting sensory perceptions or comprehending testimony implicitly relies on working memory. Consequently, some memory beliefs must possess an intrinsic epistemic warrant that is independent of external corroboration.

Which of the following best describes the point of disagreement between Philosopher A and Philosopher B?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Whether an isolated memory belief can possess epistemic warrant independently of corroboration from other evidentiary sources.

Answer

The philosophers disagree on whether an isolated memory belief can possess epistemic warrant independently of corroboration from other evidentiary sources.
The correct answer identifies the exact point of logical conflict between the two speakers. Philosopher A explicitly states that a memory belief isolated from external corroboration 'lacks any epistemic warrant.' Philosopher B explicitly counters this by concluding that 'some memory beliefs must possess an intrinsic epistemic warrant that is independent of external corroboration.' Thus, they directly disagree on whether such independent epistemic warrant is possible.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze Philosopher A's argument.
Philosopher A asserts that memory beliefs are justified ONLY through external corroboration (perceptions and testimony), and explicitly concludes that an isolated memory belief lacks epistemic warrant.
To identify Philosopher A's core conclusion and constraints regarding memory justification.
2
Analyze Philosopher B's argument.
Philosopher B asserts that requiring external corroboration for every memory belief causes an infinite regress, concluding that some memory beliefs must possess intrinsic epistemic warrant independent of external corroboration.
To identify Philosopher B's core conclusion and how it conceptually interacts with Philosopher A's claims.
3
Compare the two positions to find the explicit point of conflict.
Philosopher A claims NO isolated memory belief has independent warrant. Philosopher B claims SOME memory beliefs DO have independent warrant without external corroboration.
The correct answer to a 'Point at Issue' question must be a statement that one speaker explicitly affirms and the other explicitly denies.

Key Concept

Point at Issue and Point of Agreement
PreviousPage 10 / 34Next