#3 - Adults have the right to vote; so should adolescents.

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Method-Argument Part. The correct answer choice is (E).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice.

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[andriana.caban]

Hi!

I'm not sure I'm on the correct thread - can someone direct me to the analysis of this question as a Method of Reasoning question. I'm using the Logical Reasoning question type trainer (it's page 196, question 7).

I choose (E) but I'm confused about what "point at issue" means in answer choice (D).

I also would like to know under what conditions would (A) and (B) be correct?


Thanks!

[Jeremy Press]

Hi Andriana!

We've moved this question to a new thread that discusses the Method of Reasoning form of this question, question 3 on the first logical reasoning section of the October 1994 exam. (Incidentally, on that exam in the first LR section, question 2 used this stimulus as an Assumption question, and question 3 used this same stimulus as the Method of Reasoning question you're asking about.)

First of all, great job getting to the right answer here, but also great work in not being satisfied with just picking the right answer! You get as much value from analyzing closely the wrong answers as you do from analyzing the correct answer.

The phrase "point at issue" in answer choice D simply means the "point in dispute" between two sides. In this argument there is an implied dispute between the author, who thinks adolescents should be allowed to vote, and others (who presumably believe the opposite). So the point at issue is whether adolescents should be allowed to vote. The claim that "adolescents and adults are not the same" is not used by the author to distract from the issue of adolescents voting. Rather, that claim is used to argue for why they should be allowed to vote (because they have their own distinct interests that cannot be represented by adults).

Answer choice A would only be correct if the argument were designed to lead to the conclusion that adolescents and adults are not the same. If it were correct, you'd see a completely different argument, with premises focusing on laying out why adolescents and adults are different, leading up to the claim that they are not the same. Instead, in this argument the differences between the groups are the reasons/support for the conclusion that adolescents should be allowed to vote.

Answer choice B is describing an "elaboration," a claim used to clarify and make a term more precise. Usually, that type of claim is introduced by some synonym of a phrase like "that is to say," after which the author clarifies and makes the just-referenced term more precise. Here, there is no term that the claim is clarifying or making more precise, so answer choice B cannot be correct.

I hope this helps!

Jeremy

[cutiepie]

Why is answer choice E right but C wrong? How could I have known what role the statement played before reading the answer choices?

[Jeremy Press]

Hi cutiepie,

The problem with answer choice C is that the claim we're focused on describing ("adolescents and adults are not the same") is not the consequence of any other claim that the author makes in the stimulus. A consequence is something that is the "result" of something else. What is adolescents and adults not being the same the result of? Their differing ages, and hence the difference in their level of development? But the stimulus never says that. In other words, the stimulus never identifies a cause of adolescents and adults being different, so we can't describe adolescents and adults being different as the consequence of anything discussed in the stimulus.

To identify the role of any claim in the stimulus, first start by finding the main conclusion of the argument, and then identify the premises of (the supporting reasons/evidence of) that conclusion. What's our author trying to convince us of? That adolescents should have the right to vote. That's our main conclusion, right up front in the stimulus ("so should adolescents"). Why does the author think that? It has to do with the fact that adults cannot represent the interests of adolescents adequately, stated toward the end of the stimulus. The last two sentences (building this point that adults cannot represent adolescent interests) are thus the premises for the conclusion.

So, what's the statement that adolescents and adults are not the same doing in the argument? It comes right after the main conclusion, and follows the term "admittedly." Admittedly is a term "admitting" something. It's often used to "admit" something that the other side might use to object to your argument. So the author just admits it, then goes from there. In argumentative terms, we sometimes call that a "concession" (something that you "concede" to the other side and then argue from or around). That's answer choice E! The statement concedes a point (by admitting it) which the author then builds from to get to the main conclusion (adults/adolescents are different, so the adults cannot represent the adolescents, so the adolescents need to be able to represent themselves, so they should be able to vote).

I hope this helps!

[kupwarriors9]

Why is A incorrect and E correct? I thought "adolescents & adults are ≠ the same" would be the main conclusion because it's the one that gets the support. Conversely, I thought "If adults ≠ represent... then only by giving ... represented" would be the sub-conclusion since it seems this is the one giving the support. Can you tell me where my thought process went wrong?

Thanks,
KW9

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi KW9,

When we identify the conclusion, we want to look for what the author is supporting. What's evidence here, and what's support? Breaking down this argument, the author essentially says that since adults cannot represent the interests of adolescents, adolescents' interests can only be represented by giving them the right to vote. Therefore, they should get the right to vote. We can identify "adolescents should have the right to vote" as the conclusion because that is what is supported by the fact that they can't have their interests represented otherwise.

The statement in this question (adolescents and adults are not the same) fits in to the argument in an interesting way. The statement is preceded by the word "admittedly." That's a hint to us that the author is admitting something that may be harmful to their argument. Another word for admitting a possibly counter point is the word "concede," and that's the term used in our correct answer choice. The author starts his argument that adolescents should have the right to vote by pointing out that adults have that right. They then concede that there are differences between adults and adolescents, but the author then uses that fact to further support the argument that adolescents should vote. It's their very differences that make it critical, in the author's mind, that adolescents get voting rights.

Hope that helps!