- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Sat Jul 08, 2017 11:07 am
#36945
Complete Question Explanation
Method of Reasoning—Argument Part. The correct answer choice is (C)
The argument in this stimulus breaks down as follows:
aware that it is a premise which supports the author’s conclusion.
Answer choice (A): This choice is incorrect. The premise suggests that one may have to engage in
drastic dietary changes, which does not counter the doctors’ suggestion in any way. Furthermore, the
stimulus states that “often,” moderate changes are insufficient, which leaves open the possibility that
moderate changes are sometimes sufficient.
Answer choice (B): The argument presents a vegetarian diet as an example of a dramatic dietary change,
not as a diet superior to any that contains meat. Since the argument does not make the claim that
vegetarian diets are always superior, this choice is incorrect.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. The author’s conclusion is that more than a
moderate dietary change might be necessary to reduce cholesterol levels, and the premise in the second
sentence provides support for that conclusion.
Answer choice (D): The claim in question was not made to explain the success of vegetarian diets, but
rather to point out the common necessity of making drastic dietary changes.
Answer choice (E): This choice reflects the value of breaking down each stimulus to its logical
components. After isolating the conclusion and the premises of this argument, it is very clear that the
second sentence is not a conclusion, so this answer choice is incorrect.
Method of Reasoning—Argument Part. The correct answer choice is (C)
The argument in this stimulus breaks down as follows:
- Premise: Doctors urge patients to lower cholesterol levels with moderate dietary changes.
Premise: Moderate changes are often not effective in reduction of cholesterol.
Conclusion: One may need to make more dramatic changes, like becoming vegetarian, in order
to comply with their doctors’ recommendations.
aware that it is a premise which supports the author’s conclusion.
Answer choice (A): This choice is incorrect. The premise suggests that one may have to engage in
drastic dietary changes, which does not counter the doctors’ suggestion in any way. Furthermore, the
stimulus states that “often,” moderate changes are insufficient, which leaves open the possibility that
moderate changes are sometimes sufficient.
Answer choice (B): The argument presents a vegetarian diet as an example of a dramatic dietary change,
not as a diet superior to any that contains meat. Since the argument does not make the claim that
vegetarian diets are always superior, this choice is incorrect.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. The author’s conclusion is that more than a
moderate dietary change might be necessary to reduce cholesterol levels, and the premise in the second
sentence provides support for that conclusion.
Answer choice (D): The claim in question was not made to explain the success of vegetarian diets, but
rather to point out the common necessity of making drastic dietary changes.
Answer choice (E): This choice reflects the value of breaking down each stimulus to its logical
components. After isolating the conclusion and the premises of this argument, it is very clear that the
second sentence is not a conclusion, so this answer choice is incorrect.