#2 - If we are to expand the exploration of our solar system

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Resolve the Paradox. The correct answer choice is (E)

The paradox in this stimulus is found in the fact that two equal flight times have drastically different fuel requirements—one of the trips requires less than half the fuel required by the other trip of roughly equivalent distance. The correct answer choice will explain why one trip is so much more taxing, or why the other trip is so much more efficient.

Correct answer choice (E) explains the difference in fuel requirements. If there is a wide margin between the gravitational pull associated with each lift-off, this explains why one trip requires significantly more fuel than the other. None of the other answer choices resolve the paradox presented in the stimulus; attractive distracter choices (B) and (D) may look tempting, but are irrelevant because the stimulus specifies that it is the same spaceship, making trips of roughly equivalent distances.

[lyn]

I understand why E is right and it was one of the choices I was considering. But I chose B because I felt it resolved the paradox better. I missed the part where the question specifies it being the same ship. Could you please clarify?

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Lyn!

The stimulus is all about the destination of our next manned flight. Both destinations (Mars and Phobos) would take a similar amount of time to get there. But the trip to Phobos would require less than half the amount of fuel as a a trip to Mars.

For a Resolve the Paradox question such as this, we're looking for a fact to add to the seemingly contradictory facts above (same flight time, different fuel amounts) that will make the situation make sense. If we add answer choice (B) to those facts, it doesn't actually help make sense of that paradox (again: same flight time, different fuel amounts) because there's nothing above that says the expeditions would be on different sized ships. So what if smaller spaceships require less fuel than larger spaceships? Is there anything in the stimulus that says we'd be taking a smaller spaceship to Phobos than we would to Mars? We don't know anything about the sizes of the spaceships based on the stimulus, so knowing that different sized spaceships require different amounts of fuel doesn't actually help us make sense of why the trip to Phobos would require less fuel.

Focus on the facts of the stimulus. Same flight time. Different fuel loads. That's all we know. We need a piece of information that would explain why Phobos requires a much smaller fuel load even though the flight time would be the same. Answer choice (E) is the only one that does this.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[lyn]

Hi Kelsey,

Thanks for your response. If i'm understanding you correctly, I was wrong to assume that they would be going on different sized ships because there was nothing in the stimulus that indicated so. So for resolve the paradox, even though I'm trying to resolve two contradictions, I must still stick with the facts that was given and not add any information that was not given. Is that correct?

[Paul Marsh]

Hi Lyn! You're right - a general rule for Logical Reasoning questions is not to assume anything that isn't in the stimulus.

Now for Resolve the Paradox questions, we of course do need to add something to the stimulus in order to make the paradox make sense. But we want the correct answer choice to contain all that we need in order to resolve that paradox.

So here, let's say answer choice (B) said something like, "Smaller spaceships require less fuel than larger spaceships, and a voyage to Mars would require a larger spaceship than a voyage to Phobos due to Mars's environmental conditions." In that case, it would be a good answer. However, nowhere in the stimulus or in our answer choice (B) does it say that the voyage to Mars would require a different sized ship than the voyage to Phobos. We can't assume any outside information, so it's an incorrect answer.

To sum up - for a Resolve the Paradox question, the only new information that we can add to what's in the stimulus, is what's in the answer. Hope that helps!

[lyn]

Hey Paul!

Yes it makes sense and it doesn't. Ironically it's kind of paradoxical. We can't add new information that isn't given in the stimulus yet some new information is critical to solve the question. I guess to resolve this paradox, my reasoning would be: New information that sheds light or provide more context for the stimulus is acceptable but new information that is assumed or based on assumption is not. Does that reasoning sound right? If so, would that reasoning be applicable for other Family 2 question types (ie strengthen, assumption justify)?

[Adam Tyson]

I want to correct something you said there, Lyn. In Resolve, Strengthen, Justify, and also Weaken questions, we MUST add new information that was not in the stimulus! The correct answer here does just that. What we are saying about not making assumptions is that you cannot add MORE new information than what is presented in the answer choice. Answer B is new information, which is fine, but in order for it to help us we then have to assume even more new information. We would have to assume that a trip to Phobos would be done using a smaller ship than a trip to Mars would require. We cannot add anything to the answer, and the answer must resolve the paradox entirely on its own with no help from us.

Imagine an analogous argument: I am planning on driving to either Las Vegas or else to San Francisco. They are about the same distance from my home, but the trip to San Francisco will use a lot more gas. How can that be true? Would it help if I told you that my SUV uses more gas than my Prius? Not at all, unless you assumed that I would use the Prius to get to Vegas and the SUV to get to San Francisco, and you should assume nothing of the sort because I gave you no reason to believe that. Maybe I would take the SUV regardless of the destination, or maybe I would take the SUV to Vegas and the Prius to San Francisco.

What would help is if driving conditions between my home and San Francisco were much harder on my gas mileage than the conditions between home and Vegas. Maybe the trip to Vegas is all flat terrain and light traffic, and the trip to San Francisco involves going over a mountain range and spending a lot of time in heavy congestion?

So, in short, the correct answer will definitely provide new information, but that new information should be all that you need in order to accomplish your task, with no additional assumptions or help from you. I hope that resolves this one for you!

[lyn]

ohhhh I get it!!! Yes I feel like this clarifies a lot of issues I've been having with logical reasoning questions.

So for Family 2 questions, the correct answer choice will add information to the stimulus, while for Family 1, the correct answer choice will be derived solely from the information provided in the stimulus. But in neither case am I to add MY OWN information into the stimulus.

I've been adding my own information to the stimulus thinking that my extra analysis would somehow give me insight and lead me to the correct answer choice. No wonder I was struggling....