Executive Pay

Tom: Executives in this country make around 85x what the average worker earns. This is an extraordinarily large disparity, and therefore public resentment over the size of executive's salaries is justified.

Martha: Such resentment is not justified, since wealth is created by taking risks and making decisions, actions most people prefer to avoid. Generous rewards for those who choose not to avoid these actions are both fair and necessary.

Tom: I think you misunderstood me. I'm not saying that people resent that there is a large disparity here between executives' salaries and workers' salaries, but rather they resent that it is atypically large: in other countries executives earn only 20 or 30 times what the average worker earns.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point at issue between Tom and Martha?

Answer: whether public resentment of the size of executive salaries is justified (Tom says yes, Martha says no).

Difficulty Level: 1

Tom responds to Martha's critique in which one of the following ways?

Answer: He undermines the relevance of Martha's objection by making explicit his grounds for judging that the disparity at issue is unjustifiably large.

Difficulty Level: 3

Productivity at Work

Manager: One reason productivity in our office is not as high as it could be is that office workers spend too much time taking unauthorized breaks. Since the number of office workers assigned to each manager will soon be reduced, managers will be able to supervise workers more closely in the future to make sure that they are not taking unauthorized breaks. Therefore, productivity in our office will soon increase.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the manager's argument depends?

Answer: The gain in productivity that will result from reducing unauthorized breaks will exceed any loss in productivity caused by closer supervision.

Difficulty Level: 4

Rabies

Safety inspector: The number of laboratory samples of rabies virus sent through the university delivery service has recently grown dangerously high. We need to limit this use of the service.

Biologist: There is no need for a limit. The university delivery service has been handling rabies virus samples for 20 years with no accidents.

As a rebuttal of the safety inspector's claim, the biologist's reasoning is flawed in that it

Answer: Does not address the potential for harm that is posed by the recent increased in the number of samples sent through the service.

Difficulty Level: 1

Democratic Society

In a democratic society, when a political interest group exceeds a certain size, the diverse and sometimes conflicting economic interests that can be found in almost any large group of people tend to surface. Once these conflicting interests have surfaced, they can make it impossible for the political interest group to unite behind a common program. Yet to have the political impact necessary to influence legislation, a group must be united.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of the following views?

Answer: A political interest group can become ineffective by expanding to include as wide a membership as possible.

Difficulty Level: 2

Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyeqyU_LHPM

G-H-J

The gu, the hu, and the jue are types of bronze libation vessels that were produced in China during the Shang dynasty, almost 4000 years ago. Close examination of authentic gu, hu and jue vessels reveals that they all bear incised patterns symbolizing the taotie, a mythological beast of greed. It must be true then that any bronze libation vessel that does not bear incised patterns symbolizing the taotie is not an authentic vessel produced in China during the Shang dynasty.

The argument makes which one of the following errors of reasoning?

Answer: Treating the fact that some members of a category possess a certain characteristic as sufficient evidence that possession of the characteristic is necessary for membership in that category.

Difficulty Level: 1

Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-wWaR3w6as

Diet Question

Frequently, people who diet to lose weight become trapped in a vicious cycle. When those people diet, they not only lose weight, but their bodies become used to fewer calories and become accustomed to functioning at that lower rate of caloric intake. As a result, when they stop dieting and go back to eating amounts of food that would have just maintained their weight in the days before the diet, they take in far more calories than they need. Those excess calories produce excess weight.

The passage above best supports which one of the following conclusions about people who diet to lose weight?

Answer: They must not go back to eating pre-diet amounts of food if they are to maintain their weight at the reduced level resulting from dieting.

Difficulty Level: 2

Video:
https://youtu.be/L6BBsUyMM_Y

Understanding the Impact of Additional Information

Sometimes you'll be asked to STRENGTHEN, WEAKEN or simply FIGURE OUT what additional information would be helpful to know.

1. A weakener or strengthener must affect the support for the conclusion.
- Beware of answer choices that are relevant to the general subject matter but relevant to the way the argument supports its conclusion.

Sufficient and Necessary Assumptions

Sufficient
In answering sufficient assumption questions, you need to find a link between the stated premises and the conclusion. Try to determine from the explicit parts of the argument what logical work that link needs to do. Finally, look among the answer choices for one that can do that logical work and that, taken along with the explicit premises, allows the conclusion to be properly inferred.

In trying to figure out what logical work the link needs to do, don't get too specific. Answer choice (A) was not the only possible sufficient assumption. An equally acceptable sufficient assumption would have been "People cannot feel secure if they have vague limits on their freedom." So don't approach the answer choices with too specific a view of what you're looking for.

When trying to identify a sufficient assumption, keep in mind that the correct answer must, when added to the argument's explicit premises, result in a conclusive argument; that is, in an argument that fully establishes its conclusion (provided that the explicit premises and the added assumption are all true).

Sample question prompts
Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the conclusion of the argument to be properly drawn?

The conclusion follows logically from the premises if which one of the following is assumed?

Necessary
A necessary assumption is an indispensable link in the support for the conclusion of an argument. Therefore, an argument will be ineffective if a necessary assumption is deemed to be false. This points to a useful test: to see whether an answer choice is a necessary assumption, suppose that what is stated in that answer choice is false. If under those circumstances the premises of the argument fail to support the conclusion, the answer choice being evaluated is a necessary assumption.

Test for necessary assumptions by asking whether the argument would fail if your answer choice is false. 

Denying the answer choice (by negating it) - if it causes the argument to fail means that you have found a necessary assumption.

Some points to consider
1. Identifying necessary assumptions is a matter of logically analyzing the structure of an argument
2. Identifying an assumption is a matter of probing the structure of an argument and recognizing hidden parts of that structure
3. An argument may have more than one necessary assumption but only one of them will appear in the answer choices. But the one that does appear may not be one that occurred to you when you analyzed the argument. So it is a good idea not to prejudge what the correct answer will be. Instead, keep an open mind and examine each of the answer choices in turn.


Sample question prompts
The argument relies on assuming which one of the following?

The argument depends on the assumption that

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?

Necessary/Sufficient 2

Necessary is something that must occur for the second act to follow (but does not guarantee that Act 2 will occur).

For example, it is necessary to put food into your mouth before you can eat. You can't eat without first putting food into your mouth.

So in general, when you have a statement that expresses a necessary condition, it allows you to infer something in just two cases:

1. You can infer from knowing that if the necessary condition is not met that the thing it is the necessary condition for does not occur.

- If you don't buy a Powerball ticket, then you won't win the Powerball jackpot.

2. You can infer that the necessary condition is met from knowing that the thing it is the necessary condition for occurs.

- If you won the Powerball jackpot, then it means you bought a Powerball ticket.

Sufficient is something that guarantees that the second act follows.

Rain is sufficient to make the sidewalk wet.

If the sidewalk is dry then you know it didn't rain.

So in general, when you have a statement that expresses a sufficient condition, it allows you to infer something in just two cases:

1. If you know that the sufficient condition is met, then you can infer that the thing it is the sufficient condition for occurs

2. You can infer that the sufficient condition is not met from knowing that the thing it is the sufficient condition for does not occur

Necessary and Sufficient Conditions

Necessary Conditions:
If P is necessary for Q, then Q cannot be true unless P is true.

In other words:
Q is true only if P is true.
"P is necessary for Q because P being true is needed for Q to be true."

For example, what is necessary to get into a university.

1. You must be a human being (a bug can't get into a university)
2. You must submit an application (without an application, you can't get in)
3. Having decent grades (if you're a dummy then you won't get in)

Another example, what is necessary to win the Powerball

1. You must buy a ticket (without a ticket you can't win because you have no chance)

Necessary conditions represent things that must be in place for a certain outcome to occur but in and of itself does not guarantee that certain outcome. If that desired outcome occurs, however, the necessary condition was first met.


Sufficient Conditions:
If P is sufficient for Q, then P's being true is enough to make Q true.

In other words:
If P is true then Q is true.
"P is sufficient for Q because is P is all you need to get Q, P is enough to get Q."

For example, what is a sufficient condition to get into a university.

1. You are a super smart whiz kid who won the Nobel Peace Prize (the university wants you then)
2. You are the No. 1 athlete in the world (the university wants you then)

Another example, what is sufficient to have make the sidewalks get wet?

Rain - if it rains then it guarantees that the sidewalk will get wet. Of course there are other things that can cause the sidewalk to get wet (sprinkler system, water balloon, etc.) but just as long as there is rain that's enough to say that the sidewalk is going to get wet.


Something that is Necessary but not Sufficient: Steering a Car Well
1. Steering a car well is necessary for driving a car well. However, it is not sufficient for driving well. What if you steer like a boss but drive through a stop sign without obeying it?

Something that is Sufficient but not Necessary: Boiling a Potato
1. Boiling a potato is sufficient for cooking it. However, it is not necessary for cooking it as there are other ways in which you can cook a potato (microwave it, bake it in the oven, etc.)

Identifying Points on Which Disputants Hold Conflicting Views

This is a famous painting. Do you know what it is?

Mary: Computers will make more information available to ordinary people than was ever available before, thus making it easier for them to acquire knowledge without consulting experts.

Joyce: As more knowledge became available in previous centuries, the need for specialists to synthesize and explain it to nonspecialists increased. So computers will probably create a greater dependency on experts.

What do Mary and Joyce disagree about?

Step 1: Form a clear mental picture about what's going on.
Step 2: What does what each person say commit them to?

So Mary says "Computers will decrease our dependency on experts."

Joyce says "Computers will increase our dependency on experts."

Correct answer: M & J disagree over whether computers will increase the need for ordinary people seeking knowledge to turn to experts. Mary says no. Joyce says yes.

Some points to consider:
1. The evidence that two speakers disagree about a particular point ALWAYS comes from what they EXPLICITLY say.
2. Rely only on what a speaker explicitly says and on what can be properly inferred from that.
3. The incorrect answer choices are 1. two speakers agree or 2. the view of at least one of the speakers cannot be determined on what has been said.

What Can Be Concluded (MBT and Soft MBT)

What is supported by the body of available evidence? A and B conclusively lead to what?

You are looking for something that is guaranteed to be true by the information you have been given. In other words, something that MUST BE TRUE.

Example:

Any sale item that is purchased can be returned for store credit but not for a refund of the purchase price. Every home appliance and every piece of gardening equipment is on sale with selected construction tools.

Answer:

Home appliance, gardening equipment and the selected construction tools cannot be returned for cash. Store credit only. No piece of gardening equipment is returnable for a refund.

Some points to consider:

1. For some claim to logically follow from certain information, that information has to guarantee that the claim is true. It isn't enough for the information to strongly support the claim; it has to consluviely establish the claim.

2. Answer choices are often incorrect because they take things one step beyond what the evidence supports. The claim might be too sweeping, they might say "all" when the evidence supports only a "most". Or where a statement about "likely to be" is warranted, an incorrect answer choice might say "is". Or where a statement about "all known cases" is warranted, an incorrect answer choice might say "all cases."

3. A modest or limited claim can be a correct answer even if the information supports a stronger claim. For example, there will be a festival every month and there will be a festival in June are equal statements.

4. Incorrect answers to questions about what logically follows can be claims that receive some support but that nevertheless could be false even though all of the information is correct.

Soft Must Be True
Some questions ask you to identify a position that is supported by a body of evidence but not supported conclusively.

You generally get some information rather than an argument. Choose the answer that receives strong support for the information you're provided with and eliminate the answer choices that receive no significant support (the incorrect answer choices).

An example

People should avoid taking the antacid calcium carbonate in doses larger than half a gram, for despite its capacity to neutralize stomach acids, calcium carbonate can increase the calcium level in the blood and thus impair kidney function. Moreover, just half a gram of it can stimulate the production of gastrin, a stomach hormone that triggers acid secretion. 

Prediction: Don't use in doses of larger than half a gram. Why? Two reasons: 1. calcium in blood can impair kidney function and 2. gastrin can be created which in turn leads to acid secretion.

Correct answer choice: Half a gram of calcium carbonate can causally contribute to both the secretion and the neutralization of stomach acids.

Some points to consider
1. Base your judgment about whether or not a particular answer choice is supported strictly on the information that is explicitly provided in the passage.

2. Support for the correct answer does not have to involved all of the information provided.

Matching Patterns of Reasoning

1-2-a-1-2-3

How to do tackle these problems?

Get a solid intuitive grasp of the logical structure of the reference argument:

What is the conclusion and how do the premises fit together to support the conclusion?


Some tips
1. Similarity or dissimilarity in subject matter does not matter
2. Background material that is not a premise or conclusion does not matter
3. Order of the premises or conclusion does not matter

An example
Conclusion: Ash is unlikely to ever collect a stone not from Tanzania.
Premise 1: She only collects Tanzanite stones.
Premise 2: All known deposits of Tanzanite are in Tanzania.

Prediction
Conclusion: It is UNLIKELY (not definitely will not happen)

Conclusion: The owls will probably never eat an animal that lives outside the lagoon.
Premise 1: The diet of all the owls on Scrag Island consists entirely of frogs on the island.
Premise 2: The only frogs yet discovered on Scrag Island live in the lagoon.

Main Point

Question: Are eggs a dairy product?



Conclusion: Despite being sold in the dairy aisle, eggs are not a dairy product. 

Premise 1: Dairy is a product of the mammary gland of mammals. 

Premise 2: Dairy refers to milk and anything made from milk, like cheese, butter and yogurt. 

Premise 3: Eggs are not made from milk. They don't even come from a milk-producing animal.

Main Point: Look for a position that the argument as a whole is trying to establish.

If it is not the Main Point, then it is:

1. A statement that, either directly or indirectly, give reasons for that position.
2. Background information
3. Contextual information

50,000 Calories Challenge

I am probably the third guy from the right at the moment. Would like to get to the second guy.

During Q4 2016, I'm going to burn 50,000 calories. As a result, I should lose 10 pounds and drop from 165 to 155 (at a minimum) and hopefully drop to 150.

October 2-9

6765 burned, 43,235 more to go

October 10-16


October 17-23


October 24-30