- Posts: 14
- Joined: Oct 17, 2016
page 465 problem #4 "nutritionist: Because....Thus, the more our diet consists of wild foods, the healthier we will be"
question stem: " the claim that humans are still biologically adopted to a diet of wild foods plays which one of the following roles in the nutritionist's argument ?"
From the question stem we can conclude that it is a method - AP (argument part)
According to the book's explanation on AP " features two conclusions - main conclusion and a sub-contusion- where the main conclusion is typically place in the first or second sentence of the stimulus without conclusion indicators, whereas the sub-conclusion is place in the last sentence of the stimulus WITH conclusion indicators, such as thus, therefore, etc. with that being said, question #4 AP - I identified "it is clear that humans are still biologically adapted to a diet of wild foods, consisting mainly of raw fruits and vegetables, nuts and seeds, lean meat, and seafood" as the main conclusion because is a AP question, the conclusion is at the beginning of the stimulus, it doesn't have conclusion indicators.
Accordingly, I identified "thus, the more our diet consists of wild foods, the healthier we will be." as the sub-conclusion.
I clearly got it wrong, because the book says that the main conclusion in the AP question was the last part of the stimulus, that one with conclusion indicators.
This is a total contradiction for me, and caused a big confusion.
I thought I knew how to differentiate sub-contusions from main conclusions. But I guess there is still a missing gap. Could you please explain their big difference and how to rapidly identify sub-conclusion and main conclusion.
My understanding was that sub-conclusion is the conclusion to the premise but the premise to the main conclusion.
main conclusion is the main point of the whole argument.
thanks for your attention.