Complete Question Explanation
Parallel Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (B)
Because insomnia can result from thoughts that arise in either half of the brain, the author advocates adopting a strategy (counting sheep) that will eliminate the possibility of either cause producing the undesired effect (insomnia).
Answer choice (A): The conclusion test can quickly eliminate this answer choice, since the argument in the stimulus does not advocate adopting one or another of two strategies instead of a third. This answer choice is incorrect.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. Just as insomnia can be the product of thoughts arising in either half of the brain, furniture damage can result from either cats' claws or their teeth. In both arguments, the proposed solution (counting sheep, toy mice) eliminates both potential causes of the problem.
Answer choice (C): The conclusion in this answer choice suggests that there are two ways of accomplishing the same goal (going to Centreville), not that there is a singular way of solving two distinct problems (which is the argument in the stimulus). The conclusion test is a quick way to prove that answer choice (C) is incorrect.
Answer choice (D): Storing both chemicals separately does not eliminate two potential causes of a given undesirable effect, but only one — the risk of explosion.
Answer choice (E): As with answer choice (A), the conclusion test can quickly eliminate this answer choice as well, since the stimulus does not advocate adopting one strategy over another.
#8 - The kind of thoughts that keep a person from falling
3 posts • Page 1 of 1
I just went over question 5 of page 8-52 of the online course. When I initially approached the problem, I immediately keyed in on answer choice B because it somewhat matched my prephrase that in order to prevent a certain result, two actions need to be taken to prevent such a result. I was certain I was right but I wanted to go about practicing the concepts covered in your course material so I honed in on the conclusion and ultimately decided that the strength of the stimulus conclusion ("should") was not the same as the strength of answer choice B ("can"). Moreover, am I missing something?
Good news! I don't think you were confused at all—it just looks like you misread "would" as "should." The stimulus conclusion says
"would be able to fall asleep," and "be able to" matches perfectly with answer choice B's conclusion of "can be prevented."
3 posts • Page 1 of 1