#10 - A new process enables ordinary table salt to be

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Method of Reasoning—AP. The correct answer choice is (B)

Your task in this Method of Reasoning question is to select the answer that best describes the role
played in the stimulus by the statement that people consume salt in quantities that would provide
iron in significant amounts. Reordered for clarity, the argument proceeds:

Premise: a new process enables ordinary table salt to be fortified with iron

Premise: salt is used as a preservative for food and a flavor enhancer all over the globe

Premise: people consume salt in quantities that would provide iron in significant
amounts

Conclusion: thus, this advance could help reduce the high incidence of anemia in the
world’s population due to a deficiency of iron in the diet.

The correct answer choice in this Method of Reasoning—Argument Part question will properly
identify the statement presented in the stimulus as premise. The incorrect choices will describe some
argument part other than a premise.

Answer choice (A): The statement at issue was a premise, not a conclusion.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. This choice is correct because it identifies
the role of a premise, to provide support for the conclusion of the argument.

Answer choice (C): As a premise, the role of the statement was to support the conclusion. The
argument was not directed against it.

Answer choice (D): The statement supported the conclusion, and did not limit or qualify it.

Answer choice (E): This statement regarding people’s consumption of salt was a statement of fact,
not a rule concerning how a person should think or act.

[smile22]

For this question, I was easily able to answer it correctly. However, I am requesting clarification on how to interpret answer D ("it qualifies the conclusion of the argument"). Does this answer choice describe a subsidiary conclusion?

[Emily Haney-Caron]

Hi Smile,

D means that the answer choice limits the conclusion in some way; like, it creates an exception to the conclusion. For example, if I concluded that people should always go barefoot in the summer, but then I realized that there are places in the world where it might still be too cold to go outside barefoot, I might qualify my conclusion by saying that people should always go barefoot in the summer, unless they live in an area where it is very cold, even in the summer.

Emily

[smile22]

Thank you!

[ericau02]

Hi can you just explain what is meant when it says to "qualify" the conclusion? I go this question correct,but I left ac (D) as a contender bc I was unsure of the meaning of "qualify" and what it means in a method AP question. Thanks!

[Adam Tyson]

Good question, ericau02! That term is used a lot on the LSAT, so it's important to understand it. To "qualify" a claim is to limit it in some way. I might argue that because chocolate makes me feel good, it must be good for me, but then I could qualify that conclusion by saying "but only in moderation." Think of a qualified conclusion as one that has been reduced in scope or narrowed. Words that we typically see around qualifying statements include "but", "provided that", "somewhat", and "at least" (as in "at least some of the time" or "in at least some cases"). There are many others, but that should give you the general idea of how a conclusion can be limited, or "qualified."