Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorIdentifying Counterarguments and Opposing Positions

Epidemiologists long held that dietary sodium was the primary driver of essential hypertension in urban populations. However, recent longitudinal studies suggest that elevated sugar consumption exerts a far more pronounced effect on vascular resistance. Proponents of sodium reduction argue that public policy should continue targeting salt intake, citing decades of population-level data. Nonetheless, this focus on sodium fails to address the underlying metabolic pathways triggered by refined carbohydrates. Consequently, current intervention strategies should be restructured to prioritize dietary sugar reduction.

In the argument above, which of the following best describes the structural role of the claim that public policy should continue targeting salt intake?

  1. A
    It is the main conclusion of the argument, which the author attempts to defend using evidence from longitudinal studies.
  2. It presents an opposing position that the argument acknowledges and ultimately seeks to refute in favor of a new recommendation.Cevap
  3. C
    It serves as factual background evidence introduced by the author to support the restructuring of current health interventions.
  4. D
    It is a qualifying counterargument that the author accepts as a valid limitation of prioritizing sugar reduction.
  5. E
    It functions as an intermediate conclusion supporting the claim that sugar consumption drives vascular resistance.

Cevap

The statement represents an opposing position that the argument introduces and subsequently refutes.
The passage explicitly attributes the target statement to 'proponents of sodium reduction' and follows it with the transition word 'Nonetheless', indicating that the author rejects this perspective. The author then concludes that health policy should shift away from sodium toward sugar, making the statement an opposing position that the argument refutes.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the structural components of the passage
Identified traditional belief (sodium causes hypertension), new evidence (sugar effect), opposing position (continue sodium reduction policy), author's counter-premise (sodium focus fails metabolic pathways), and main conclusion (prioritize sugar reduction).
Deconstructing the argument flow is essential to mapping the function of each statement.
2
Locate the targeted statement and examine surrounding transition words
The targeted statement is introduced as the view of 'proponents of sodium reduction' and is followed by the pivot word 'Nonetheless'.
Transition words signal structural shifts and clarify whether a claim is endorsed or challenged by the author.
3
Evaluate the relationship between the targeted statement and the main conclusion
The author rejects the sodium-focused policy to argue for prioritizing sugar reduction.
Determining how the claim interacts with the author's ultimate conclusion reveals its structural role as an opposing position being challenged.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Counterarguments and Opposing Positions
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Identifying Counterarguments and Opposing Positions