- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Tue Mar 03, 2020 5:14 pm
#74170
Complete Question Explanation
Strengthen. The correct answer choice is (B)
Following is the structure of the medical doctor’s argument:
Premise: Sleep deprivation is the cause of many social ills, ranging from irritability to
potentially dangerous instances of impaired decision making.
Premise: Most people today suffer from sleep deprivation to some degree.
Conclusion: Therefore we should restructure the workday to allow people flexibility in
scheduling their work hours.
The first premise contains a causal assertion (not a causal conclusion), and the second premise
indicates that most people suffer from the stated cause. This combination would lead to the
conclusion that most people have a social ill (which could be irritability or impaired decision
making, or something in between). However, the conclusion in the argument leaps over this idea
to conclude that the workday should be restructured. The missing link—or assumption—in the
argument is that restructuring the workday would alleviate the sleep deprivation. As always,
whenever you see a gap in the argument, you can strengthen the argument by eliminating that gap.
By relating sleep to work, answer choice (B) closes the gap in the argument.
Answer choice (A): This is a tricky answer, and the key word is “overwork.” While the author clearly
believes that work schedules affect sleep, this does not mean that employees are being overworked. For
example, a person may be sleep deprived because they have to come into work at 8 A.M. Perhaps they
have children so they must get up very early to take care of their family. The person might then work a
normal eight hour day and be sleep deprived not because of overwork but because of rising early.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer. By indicating that employees would avoid sleep
deprivation with a revised workday, this answer affirms that the leap made in (or gap in) the
argument is not an unreasonable one.
Answer choice (C): This answer may hurt the argument by suggesting that some individuals cannot
be helped by the restructuring of the workday. At best, this answer has no impact on the argument
because we already know that most people suffer from sleep deprivation to some degree.
Answer choice (D): This answer addresses the fact that the hours worked per week have decreased.
But the argument is not about the average number of hours worked, but rather the way that those
hours affect sleep. Thus, this answer does not help the conclusion that people should be allowed
flexibility in scheduling.
Answer choice (E): The argument does not suggest that the workday will be shortened, only that the
day will be structured so that people have more flexibility in scheduling their hours. Thus, knowing
that the extent of sleep deprivation is proportional to the length of one’s workday does not strengthen
the argument.
Strengthen. The correct answer choice is (B)
Following is the structure of the medical doctor’s argument:
Premise: Sleep deprivation is the cause of many social ills, ranging from irritability to potentially dangerous instances of impaired decision making. Premise: Most people today suffer from sleep deprivation to some degree. Conclusion: Therefore we should restructure the workday to allow people flexibility in scheduling their work hours.The first premise contains a causal assertion (not a causal conclusion), and the second premise
indicates that most people suffer from the stated cause. This combination would lead to the
conclusion that most people have a social ill (which could be irritability or impaired decision
making, or something in between). However, the conclusion in the argument leaps over this idea
to conclude that the workday should be restructured. The missing link—or assumption—in the
argument is that restructuring the workday would alleviate the sleep deprivation. As always,
whenever you see a gap in the argument, you can strengthen the argument by eliminating that gap.
By relating sleep to work, answer choice (B) closes the gap in the argument.
Answer choice (A): This is a tricky answer, and the key word is “overwork.” While the author clearly
believes that work schedules affect sleep, this does not mean that employees are being overworked. For
example, a person may be sleep deprived because they have to come into work at 8 A.M. Perhaps they
have children so they must get up very early to take care of their family. The person might then work a
normal eight hour day and be sleep deprived not because of overwork but because of rising early.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer. By indicating that employees would avoid sleep
deprivation with a revised workday, this answer affirms that the leap made in (or gap in) the
argument is not an unreasonable one.
Answer choice (C): This answer may hurt the argument by suggesting that some individuals cannot
be helped by the restructuring of the workday. At best, this answer has no impact on the argument
because we already know that most people suffer from sleep deprivation to some degree.
Answer choice (D): This answer addresses the fact that the hours worked per week have decreased.
But the argument is not about the average number of hours worked, but rather the way that those
hours affect sleep. Thus, this answer does not help the conclusion that people should be allowed
flexibility in scheduling.
Answer choice (E): The argument does not suggest that the workday will be shortened, only that the
day will be structured so that people have more flexibility in scheduling their hours. Thus, knowing
that the extent of sleep deprivation is proportional to the length of one’s workday does not strengthen
the argument.