- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Tue Jan 07, 2020 12:00 pm
#73108
Complete Question Explanation
Must Be True. The correct answer choice is (B).
Ming says that it is good that trans fats (which are unhealthy) have been removed from many cookies. Carol questions this claim, pointing out that desserts (like cookies) are not healthy even when they have no trans fats. The stem asks us describe how Carol must have interpreted Ming's claim.
It is apparent that Carol has, in fact misinterpreted Ming's claim to mean that she thinks cookies without trans fats are now healthy, and that is our prephrase. Ming, of course, said nothing of the kind, suggesting only that they are less unhealthy without trans fats than with them. If this was a Flaw in the Reasoning question, we would probably say that Carol has committed a relativity flaw, equating "less unhealthy" (a relative claim) with "healthy" (an absolute claim).
Answer choice (A): There is no indication that Carol interpreted Ming's claim to be about a sliding scale or correlation, with more trans fats being more unhealthy, but only that removing trans fats makes the cookies healthy (rather than just less unhealthy).
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. This matches our prephrase. Carol seems to think that Ming believes taking trans fats out of cookies doesn't just make them less unhealthy, but that it actually makes them healthy.
Answer choice (C): This answer presents something like a false dilemma, failing to consider that some foods may be neither healthy nor unhealthy, but neutral. Carol's interpretation was a form of relativity flaw, not a false dilemma.
Answer choice (D): Carol's misinterpretation is not about how unhealthy a cookie that has trans fat may be, but how healthy a cookie without trans fat would be.
Answer choice (E): Neither Ming nor Carol makes any claims about what consumers should or should not do, and Carol does not interpret Ming's claim to be about what should or should not be done.
Must Be True. The correct answer choice is (B).
Ming says that it is good that trans fats (which are unhealthy) have been removed from many cookies. Carol questions this claim, pointing out that desserts (like cookies) are not healthy even when they have no trans fats. The stem asks us describe how Carol must have interpreted Ming's claim.
It is apparent that Carol has, in fact misinterpreted Ming's claim to mean that she thinks cookies without trans fats are now healthy, and that is our prephrase. Ming, of course, said nothing of the kind, suggesting only that they are less unhealthy without trans fats than with them. If this was a Flaw in the Reasoning question, we would probably say that Carol has committed a relativity flaw, equating "less unhealthy" (a relative claim) with "healthy" (an absolute claim).
Answer choice (A): There is no indication that Carol interpreted Ming's claim to be about a sliding scale or correlation, with more trans fats being more unhealthy, but only that removing trans fats makes the cookies healthy (rather than just less unhealthy).
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. This matches our prephrase. Carol seems to think that Ming believes taking trans fats out of cookies doesn't just make them less unhealthy, but that it actually makes them healthy.
Answer choice (C): This answer presents something like a false dilemma, failing to consider that some foods may be neither healthy nor unhealthy, but neutral. Carol's interpretation was a form of relativity flaw, not a false dilemma.
Answer choice (D): Carol's misinterpretation is not about how unhealthy a cookie that has trans fat may be, but how healthy a cookie without trans fat would be.
Answer choice (E): Neither Ming nor Carol makes any claims about what consumers should or should not do, and Carol does not interpret Ming's claim to be about what should or should not be done.