#16 - Allowing more steel imports would depress domestic

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Parallel Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (E)

This stimulus provides a fairly simple argument:

• Premise: Increasing steel imports would hurt the steel industry.
  
  Premise: The present government would not do anything to hurt the steel industry.
  
  Conclusion: Therefore the government will continue to restrict those imports.

Because this argument is on the simpler side, we will more likely be able to Double the Conclusion and quickly eliminate at least some of the wrong answer choices presented. Again, the author concludes that the government will continue to restrict steel imports. This is an absolute conclusion, so the answer choice which parallels the author’s argument should provide a similarly absolute conclusion.

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice. Answer choice (E) is the only choice which displays valid logic and an absolute conclusion. The argumentation, as shown below, provides a solid parallel:

• Premise: Bright floodlights would make the telescope useless.
  
  Premise: The astronomy department wouldn’t do anything to make the telescope useless.
  
  Conclusion: The astronomy department will not support the floodlight idea.

Incorrect answer choice (A) ends with a conclusion that is slightly less absolute: “we can expect…” Additionally, this choice reflects a mistaken negation, flawed reasoning which cannot parallel the valid reasoning found in the stimulus. None of the other choices’ conclusions parallel the absolute conclusion found in the stimulus. Answer choice (B) provides, “there is no need…,” which doesn’t tell us much about whether such regulations will be established. Incorrect answer choices (C) and (D) both end in limited, rather than absolute, conclusions: “they will probably result…,” and “will probably not accept stock…”

[ellenb]

Dear Powerscore,

For this question I thought that it is B, however, it is E. Please let me know why it is answer choice E is the correct answer and not B? I thought it is B, since the government in the stimulus is not doing anything to help the steel industry, in answer choice B there is no need for the government to establish further costly health regulations for people who work all day at computer terminals. However, it might be different since we do not know that sitting all day at computer terminals is a problem for some people. Could that be a reason why it is wrong?

I guess, E might be right since there is actually a problem that we know of bright floodlights on campus that would make telescopes useless, therefore the astronomy department just like the government in the stimulus will not support the proposals that might be harmful to itself, just like the government will not lift restrictions on steel imports which might be potentially harmful to the domestic steel prices.

I wrote my thought process, please let me know if it makes sense, I just want to make sure I give you my thought process, so it is easier for you to see where I was going with it and where I might be going off.

thanks

Ellen

[David Boyle]

Dear Powerscore,

For this question I thought that it is B, however, it is E. Please let me know why it is answer choice E is the correct answer and not B? I thought it is B, since the government in the stimulus is not doing anything to help the steel industry, in answer choice B there is no need for the government to establish further costly health regulations for people who work all day at computer terminals. However, it might be different since we do not know that sitting all day at computer terminals is a problem for some people. Could that be a reason why it is wrong?

I guess, E might be right since there is actually a problem that we know of bright floodlights on campus that would make telescopes useless, therefore the astronomy department just like the government in the stimulus will not support the proposals that might be harmful to itself, just like the government will not lift restrictions on steel imports which might be potentially harmful to the domestic steel prices.

I wrote my thought process, please let me know if it makes sense, I just want to make sure I give you my thought process, so it is easier for you to see where I was going with it and where I might be going off.

thanks

Ellen

Hello Ellen,

A quick note: to save you time, it may not be necessary to say things like "I wrote my thought process, please let me know if it makes sense, I just want to make sure I give you my thought process, so it is easier for you to see where I was going with it and where I might be going off."
We know you are showing your thought process, etc.! And many of your thoughts are insightful and worthwhile!!
The stimulus says, "Since the present government will not do anything that would harm the domestic steel industry . . .", but you say above, "since the government in the stimulus is not doing anything to help the steel industry", which is sort of the opposite. In any case, B is sort of conclusory and not even really reasoned. Even if "workers are already guaranteed the right to a safe and healthful workplace by law", that doesn't mean ipso facto that "there is no need for the government to establish further . . . health regulations". Maybe the regulations are necessary precisely in order to guarantee the right to a safe workplace, say.
As for E: your thoughts above make some sense, since the stimulus essentially says, "si arrow slash ds; slash si" (steel imports could hurt domestic steel, so the gov't won't support imports), and E says, basically, "bf arrow slash t; slash bf" (bright floodlights hurt the telescope, so no floodlights).

Hope that helps,

David

[ellenb]

Thanks Dave, just some follow-up questions:

When you say that B is In any case, B "is sort of conclusory and not even really reasoned" what do you mean by that?

could you actually write with arrows what you meant?

was it: Si-->not DS, than not DS (so if we import steel we might not have domestic steel, therefore government is not supporting domestic steel)

was it: bf-->not T, than not T (so if we have bright floodlights we cannot see through telescopes, that is why the department is not supporting having bright floodlights on campus)


As for E "si arrow slash ds; slash si" (steel imports could hurt domestic steel, so the gov't won't support imports), and E says, basically, "bf arrow slash t; slash bf" (bright floodlights hurt the telescope, so no floodlights).


Thanks in advance!

Ellen

[David Boyle]

Thanks Dave, just some follow-up questions:

When you say that B is In any case, B "is sort of conclusory and not even really reasoned" what do you mean by that?

could you actually write with arrows what you meant?

was it: Si-->not DS, than not DS (so if we import steel we might not have domestic steel, therefore government is not supporting domestic steel)

was it: bf-->not T, than not T (so if we have bright floodlights we cannot see through telescopes, that is why the department is not supporting having bright floodlights on campus)


As for E "si arrow slash ds; slash si" (steel imports could hurt domestic steel, so the gov't won't support imports), and E says, basically, "bf arrow slash t; slash bf" (bright floodlights hurt the telescope, so no floodlights).


Thanks in advance!

Ellen

Hello,

You can probably diagram anything; maybe you could diagram B as "Guarantee arrow slash need for further regulations", say. But in common-sense terms, the logic doesn't make sense. Maybe the guarantee is just on paper, so that the further regulations are really needed to protect workers.
As for your diagramming of my diagramming: I think the way I had it was all right, so far as it went; but to flesh it out some more, one could say, as for diagramming the stimulus: "si arrow slash ds; ds arrow slash si" (steel imports could hurt domestic steel, but the gov't won't hurt domestic steel, meaning, it won't support imports); and E says, basically, "bf arrow slash t; t arrow slash bf" (bright floodlights hurt the telescope, so the astro department won't hurt the telescope, meaning, no floodlights).

David