- Mon Apr 18, 2016 5:54 pm
#23224
Complete Question Explanation
Parallel Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (D)
This Parallel question is an argument about a definition. The author gives examples of two types of "games"—one type that has rules and competition and another type that does not—and then concludes that rules and competition are not essential to the definition of "game." Basically, the argument is that not all types of this thing have these characteristics, so they are not essential to it.
Answer choice (A): Doubling the conclusions demonstrates that this answer choice is concluding that one thing is essential and another is not, which is a different conclusion. Also, applying the Premise Test demonstrates that this answer choice is dealing with two definitions—a glutton and a gourmet—not one.
Answer choice (B): Again, comparing the conclusions demonstrates that the authors arrive at different points. While the stimulus is concluding that something is not essential, this answer choice leaves the option between two contradictory conclusions open. If she concluded that eating meat is not essential to being a bear, this might be a stronger answer, but she leaves open the possibility that taxonomists are wrong: another possibility does not exist in the stimulus.
Answer choice (C): Immediately, you should notice that this conclusion is "not essential" and the stimulus conclusion is "is essential" and eliminate this answer. After that, this is a humorous answer because apparently the shape of a dog is what defines it as being a dog and eating meat shapes the dog a certain way. We are not given two types of dogs, one with a characteristic and one without. We are simply told how dogs are (carnivorous) and why they must be that way.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. This answer choice gives two types of automobiles — some that are gasoline fueled and four wheeled and others that do not have either of these characteristics. Because both of these types are still called automobiles, the conclusion, which matches the conclusion in the stimulus, is that these two characteristics are not essential to being an automobile. Don't be thrown off by the "most" as compared to the "some" in the stimulus. The reasoning still matches because two types are shown to exist.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice is not comparing two types of one thing, but talking only about Montreal. Simply because other cities are cosmopolitan and vitality as well does not mean they are not essential qualities of Montreal. The author would have to show another type of Montreal (which does not exist) to match the stimulus.
Parallel Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (D)
This Parallel question is an argument about a definition. The author gives examples of two types of "games"—one type that has rules and competition and another type that does not—and then concludes that rules and competition are not essential to the definition of "game." Basically, the argument is that not all types of this thing have these characteristics, so they are not essential to it.
Answer choice (A): Doubling the conclusions demonstrates that this answer choice is concluding that one thing is essential and another is not, which is a different conclusion. Also, applying the Premise Test demonstrates that this answer choice is dealing with two definitions—a glutton and a gourmet—not one.
Answer choice (B): Again, comparing the conclusions demonstrates that the authors arrive at different points. While the stimulus is concluding that something is not essential, this answer choice leaves the option between two contradictory conclusions open. If she concluded that eating meat is not essential to being a bear, this might be a stronger answer, but she leaves open the possibility that taxonomists are wrong: another possibility does not exist in the stimulus.
Answer choice (C): Immediately, you should notice that this conclusion is "not essential" and the stimulus conclusion is "is essential" and eliminate this answer. After that, this is a humorous answer because apparently the shape of a dog is what defines it as being a dog and eating meat shapes the dog a certain way. We are not given two types of dogs, one with a characteristic and one without. We are simply told how dogs are (carnivorous) and why they must be that way.
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. This answer choice gives two types of automobiles — some that are gasoline fueled and four wheeled and others that do not have either of these characteristics. Because both of these types are still called automobiles, the conclusion, which matches the conclusion in the stimulus, is that these two characteristics are not essential to being an automobile. Don't be thrown off by the "most" as compared to the "some" in the stimulus. The reasoning still matches because two types are shown to exist.
Answer choice (E): This answer choice is not comparing two types of one thing, but talking only about Montreal. Simply because other cities are cosmopolitan and vitality as well does not mean they are not essential qualities of Montreal. The author would have to show another type of Montreal (which does not exist) to match the stimulus.