Bold Face CR Test2

Q - 1. "The first acknowledges an observation that refutes the main position that the letter writer takes; the second is that position."? Thanks. ---------Letter writer !llegal drug use is often associated with other violent crimes. "tatistics indicate that each time police increase their enforcement of anti-drug laws in the city, the number of violent crimes committed in the city declines as a result. #owever$ eliminating criminal penalties for drug use would almost certainl% decrease rather than increase the incidence of violent crime. f drugs were no longer illegal, the price would drop precipitously, and drug users would be less li!ely to use illegal means to ac"uire the money necessary to support their drug habits. !n the letter writer&s argument$ the two portions in boldface pla% which of the following roles? The first is support offered b% the letter writer for a certain forecast; the second is that forecast. The first acknowledges an observation that refutes the main position that the letter writer takes; the second is that position. The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts will hold in the case at hand; the second offers information that$ if true$ would support that prediction. The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts will not hold in the case at hand; the second offers information that$ if true$ would support that prediction. The first is a statement that the letter writer believes is true; the second is presented as a logical inference drawn from the truth of that statement. Q - '. !t is often thought that our own modern age is uni"ue in having a large number of people who live into old age. !t has fre(uentl% been assumed that plagues$ wars$ and harsh working conditions killed off most people in previous ages before the% could reach old age. #owever$ recent research shows that in #$th century %urope, for e&ample, people over si&ty comprised #' percent of the population. The studies also revealed that although infant mortalit% remained high until the ')th centur% in *urope$ people who survived to adulthood could e+pect to live to be old. The portions in boldface pla% which of the following roles in the argument above? ,. The first is a conclusion that the author supports. The second is data that contradicts that conclusion.

-. The first is a finding that the author contests. The second is a finding that the author accepts. .. The first is an assumption that the author thinks is invalid. The second is data that validates that assumption. /. The first is a position that the author opposes. The second is a finding that supports the author&s position. *. The first is a position that the author opposes. The second is an assumption which$ if valid$ negates the author&s view. Q - 0. 1. , long time retailer of /ecT laptops commented on "hopping times maga1ine that he might stop selling /ecT laptops ne+t %ear because all his customers are bored with the same old models. !t is doubtful whether a retailer&s 2ab at one of his ma2or selling products can be an%thing other than counterproductive for his business. But in this case it definitely does not loo! to be (ustified) 3hile it is true that /ecT has not produced new model laptops for the past %ear and a half$ it does not loo! li!e people are bored with *ecT laptops. !nfact$ /ecT is planning to release a brand new model in ' months that people are reall% eager to bu%. !n the argument given$ the two boldfaced portions pla% which of the following roles? a4 The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states the conclusion. b4 The first is the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence against the position being opposed. c4 The first and second both state intermediate conclusions that are drawn in order to support 2ointl% the conclusions of the argument as a whole. d4 The first states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole. e4 The first states the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support that conclusion '. 5articipating in business plan competitions is a must for all students who want to pursue a career in .onsulting. 6ost - schools participate in the business plan competition conducted b% "chool ,; because the +chool , business plans competition is ran!ed as the best business plan competition in -orth ,merica) "chool - is among one of the school that has never participated in "chool ,&s business plan competition$ even though most students in "chool - want to pursue a career in .onsulting. !t is mostl% because "chool - has its own business plan competition. -ut +chool B will most li!ely participate in +chool ,.s business plan competition this year, because "chool - is not conducting its business plan competition. !n the argument above$ the boldfaced portions pla% which of the following roles? a4 The first provides information without which the argument lacks force; the second states

the main conclusion of the argument. b4 *ach provides evidence in support of an intermediate conclusion that supports a further conclusion stated in the argument. c4 The first sites a practice that is followed and the second sites a likel% conse(uence of this practice. d4 The first provides information without which the argument lacks force; the second states an intermediate conclusion that is used to support a further conclusion. e4 The first states evidence bearing against the main conclusion of the argument; the second is that main conclusion.

0. /any retail outlets have switched to at least partially using bags made of recycled plastic or paper) The (uestion has been raised whether it can be concluded that for a given level of sales, the retailers are using fewer number of bags made of plastic) The answer is affirmative$ since the plastic consumed for making plastic bags has slightl% decreased. !n the argument given$ the two boldfaced portions pla% which of the following roles? a4 The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion. b4 The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into (uestion. c4 The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into (uestion. d4 The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion. e4 *ach provides support for the conclusion of the argument. 7. , prominent critic of architecture has commented that the prices of the houses are sk%rocketing and that this is an unnatural price hike that is created b% the builders. !t is (uestionable whether a critic of architecture can be a critic about prices as well but in this case it is clearly not reasonable. !t is true that the price of real estate has been increasing for the past few months$ but this is definitely not orchestrated by the builders) The increase in price is because of the boom in the econom% of this countr%. !n the argument given$ the two boldfaced portions pla% which of the following roles? a4 The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states the conclusion. b4 The first states the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support that conclusion. c4 The first is the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides

evidence against the position being opposed. d4 The first states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole. e4 The first and second both state intermediate conclusions that are drawn in order to support 2ointl%$ the conclusion of the argument as a whole. 8. /irector "ince it is become an open secret that many oil companies are researching to develop a good frac!ing solution$ it will be a good decision for our compan% also to invest in developing a good fracking solution so we won&t be left behind from profiting through oil production b% fracking. ,nal%st -ut$ since most of them are investing in developing a good frac!ing solution, we will not be as profitable investing in similar research wor! that other companies are performing) !n the argument given$ the two boldfaced portions pla% which of the following roles? a4 The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion. b4 The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seeks to e+plain; the second provides evidence in support of the e+planation that the argument seeks to establish. c4 The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrar% conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument. d4 The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for (uestioning that support. e4 The first describes the circumstances that the argument as a whole seeks to e+plain; the second gives the e+planation that the argument seeks to establish Q - 7. ,n engineering firm has suggested the construction of an underwater oil pipe to complete the suppl% route of an oil s%stem connecting the source of the oil to various power stations. The route crosses a 1.0 mile-wide river$ and to build a bridge for the pipe would cost twice as much as it would to lay the pipe on the riverbed. !n order to reduce the ris! of water pollution caused by ruptures between the pipe0s segments due to water pressure$ a fairl% likel% occurrence at some point in the pipe9s duration of use$ the government rightl% plans to opt for the construction of a bridge.

The first e+plains circumstances that call the position taken b% the author into (uestion; the second holds factual information which contradicts that position. The first provides a description of a certain factor which ma% weaken the argument9s favored viewpoint; the second is that viewpoint.

The first is a comparison formulated in order to establish grounds for the argument9s conclusion; the second is the aim leading to that conclusion. The first is evidence in support of the position that the argument chooses to undermine; the second is the reasoning behind the (uestioning of that position. The first is a proposal that is supported b% the position of the argument; the second is further evidence used to strengthen that proposal. Q - 8. , product that is endorsed b% a big name celebrit% has a clear competitive edge in marketing and as a result that product can generall% command a high price. ::Because endorsement by big name celebrities tends to be short-lived:: ;usuall% less than a few %ears4 and companies want to make large profits while the% still can$ man% companies charge the ma+imum possible price for such a product during the time it is associated with the celebrit%. :: But large profits on the celebrity-associated product will give competitors a strong incentive to "uic!ly match their own products in terms of celebrity appeal) :: .onse(uentl%$ the strateg% to ma+imi1e overall profit from a celebrit%associated product is to charge less than the greatest possible price. !n the argument above$ the two portions in boldface pla% which of the following roles? ;,4 The first is an assumption that forms the basis for a course of action that the argument critici1es; the second presents the course of action endorsed b% the argument. ;-4 The first is a consideration raised to e+plain the appeal of a certain strateg%; the second is a consideration raised to call into (uestion the wisdom of adopting that strateg%. ;.4 The first is an assumption that has been used to 2ustif% a certain strateg%; the second is a consideration that is used to cast doubt on that assumption. ;/4 The first is a consideration raised in support of a strateg% the argument endorses; the second presents grounds in support of that consideration. ;*4 The first is a consideration raised to show that adopting a certain strateg% is unlikel% to achieve the intended effect; the second is presented to e+plain the appeal of that strateg%.

Q - <. *ditorial ,n arrest made b% a 6idville police officer is provisional until the officer has taken the suspect to the police station and the watch commander has officiall% approved the arrest. "uch approval is denied if the commander 2udges that the evidence onwhich the provisional arrest is based is insufficient. , government efficienc% e+pert has observed that almost all provisional arrests meet the standards for ade"uacy of evidence that the watch commanders enforce. The e+pert has therefore recommended that$ because the officers0 time spent obtaining approval is largely wasted$ the watch commander9s approval nolonger be re(uired. This recommendation should be re2ected as dangerous$ however$ since there is no assurance that the watch commanders9 standards will continue to be observed once approval is no longer re(uired. !n the editorial$ the two portions in boldface pla% which of the following roles? ;,4 The first is a claim$ the accurac% of which is disputed b%the editorial; the second is a conclusion drawn in orderto support the main conclusion of the editorial. ;-4 The first is an observation that the editorial disputes; the second is a conclusion that was drawn from that observation. ;.4 The first is a finding that was used in support of a proposal that the editorial opposes; the second is a 2udgment that was based on that finding and in turn was used to supportthe proposal. ;/4 The first is a fin ding introduced to supportthe main conclusion of the editorial; the second is that main conclusion. ;*4 The first is a conclusion$ the evidence for which the editorial evaluates; the second is part of the evidence cited in favor of that conclusion. Q - =. The president.s nominees to federal circuit courts have been (udged conservative for their stands on hot-button issues) -ut a review of their financial disclosure forms and "enate (uestionnaires reveals that the nominees are more notable for their close ties to corporate and economic interests$ especiall% the energ% and mining industries. "ome of them were paid lobb%ists for those same interests. >urther$ the nominees with industry ties were overwhelmingly appointed to circuit courts regarded as traditional

battlegrounds over litigation affecting these industries. !ndependent observers who follow the federal bench believe that the e+tensive corporate involvement among so man% of the nominees is unprecedented.

!n the argument above$ the two portions in boldface pa% which of the following roles? ,4The first is a generali1ation that the author aims to attack; the second is that attack. -4The first is a pattern that the author acknowledges as true; the second is the author&s conclusion based on that acknowledgment. .4The first is a phenomenon that the author accepts as true; the second is evidence in support of the author&s conclusion. /4The first is the author&s position based on the evidence cited; the second is a pattern presented in support of that position. *4The first is an e+ception to a rule introduced in the argument; the second provides the reasoning behind the e+ception. Q - ?. The cit% government should invest surplus funds in improving the cit%&s transportation network. /ost of the networ! was put in place at a time when the city was much smaller in both area and population) The subwa% s%stem is outdated and understaffed. The buses rarel% run on schedule and their routes are inconvenient. f the city does not ma!e changes soon to the networ!, it will see many of its pri1ed industries relocate to more convenient cities and, as a result, the city.s financial health will be (eopardi1ed) !n the argument above$ the two portions in boldface pla% which of the following roles? @ The first is an e+planation of a current state of affairs; the second is a prediction based on that state of affairs. @ The first is a statement of fact in opposition to the author&s conclusion; the second is that conclusion. @ The first emphasi1es an e+isting problem; the second offers a proposal to solve that problem. @ The first is information the author suggests has been overlooked in the situation at hand; the second describes that situation. @ The first is a 2ustification of an impending problem; the second describes the conse(uences of that problem.

Q - A. 5ublic health advocate !t is generall% true that medications that undergo the e+tensive >/, 5hase !!! clinical safet% testing are much safer than less-researched drugs. !t is also true that whenever such trials are conducted, fewer people have e&perienced une&pected harmful side effects, thus reducing public health ris!s) #owever$ eliminating the re(uirement that even >/,-tested medications continue to include e+tensive warnings about individual risk factors would almost certainl% harm rather than help public health. .onsumers would tend to rel% on the >/,&s general certification of safet%$ and if no longer encouraged to read about individual ris!s and drug interactions, many patients would suffer serious adverse reactions) The two bolded statements serve what purpose in the conte+t of the public health advocate&s argument? , The first is a general pattern that the advocate accepts as true; the second is said to be a natural conse(uence that must follow if the general pattern applies. - The first is a causal relationship that the advocate believes will happen again in the case at issue; the second admits a situation in which the relationship would not hold. . The first describes a cause and effect relationship that the advocate believes will not hold in the case at issue; the second suggests a consideration that supports that belief. / The first is proof that the advocate uses to support a prediction; the second states that prediction. * The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the stance that the advocate supports; the second is that stance. Q - 1). Traditionall%$ video game manufacturers have been most strongl% influenced b% serious video gamers. -ecause devoted gamers have historicall% purchased the ma2orit% of video games$ companies react to the desires of this market segment. Bormall%$ devoted gamers crave speed and action; thus, most manufacturers continue to produce games with faster chips and flashier graphics) Cnfortunatel%$ faster chips and flashier graphics are no longer in the industr%&s best interest. The devoted gaming mar!et is deeply stagnant, and it won.t soon e&pand) To infuse new life into the video game market$ manufacturers must simplif% the functionalit% of their games. -% doing so$ current non-gamers will be attracted to 2oin the ranks of video game fans. !n the argument$ the two portions in boldface pla% which of the following roles?

@ The first is a situation that the author believes to be true; the second offers evidence to e+plain this situation. @ The first is a situation that the author argues should not continue; the second provides evidence that supports the author&s position. @ The first is a statement of fact that contradicts the author&s position; the second is the author&s position. @ The first is a statement of fact that supports the author&s position; the second is a consideration that weighs against the author&s position. @ The first is a prediction that the author believes should not hold in this case; the second is an assumption that weighs against the author&s position. Q - 11. Letter to the editor 5roposition Q$ a controversial measure on this %ear&s ballot$ would prohibit the ownership of handguns within the cit%&s limits. Cnder the plan$ gun owners would have a A)-da% grace period to turn in their weapons to authorities. 5roponents of the proposition argue that fewer handguns on the streets would lead to less violent crime, ma!ing the city safer for all of its citi1ens) Cnfortunatel%$ the ban would actuall% have the opposite effect. "ince onl% law abiding citi1ens would honor the ban$ armed criminals would not only !eep their weapons but would also have the confidence to act with impunity on a population that could no longer defend itself) !n the letter to the editor$ the two portions in boldface pla% which of the following roles? @ The first is an observation that the author uses to support a particular position; the second is that position. @ The first is a pattern of cause and effect that the author believes to be true; the second offers evidence to contradict this pattern. @ The first is a position that the author argues will not hold in this case; the second is the author&s position. @ The first is a prediction that the author believes to be untrue. The second is a statement of fact that undermines the author&s position. @ The first is a direct relationship that the author believes will not hold in this case; the second offers evidence in support of the author&s position. Q - 1'. .hief *conomist Csuall%$ the release of economic data about higher-than-e&pected growth in the 2ross *omestic 3roduct 42*35 results in an increase in stoc! prices. #owever$ this (uarter$

the release of data about strong D/5 growth is most likel% to result in a decrease rather than an increase in stock prices. Robust 2*3 growth will lead to higher interest rates, increasing the attractiveness of bonds and causing a shift of capital from e"uity to debt securities) !n the above argument$ the statements in boldface pla% which of the following roles? @ The first acknowledges a consideration against the main conclusion of the chief economist; the second is that conclusion. @ The first is a pattern of cause and effect that the chief economist predicts will not hold in the case at issue; the second offers a consideration in support of that prediction. @ The first is a generali1ation that the chief economist accepts as true; the second is a conse(uence that follows from that generali1ation. @ The first is evidence that the chief economist provides in support of a certain prediction; the second is that prediction. @ The first is a pattern of cause and effect that the chief economist predicts will be repeated in the case at issue; the second acknowledges a circumstance in which that pattern would not hold.