81 LR One Question 13
- « 81 LR One Question 12
- 3170 of 3815
- 81 LR One Question 14 »
- You must Log in or Sign Up to post comments
I was stuck between A and C, and went with C.
Wouldn't C strengthen it also in the same way as A?
Campaign ------caused-----> decreased sickness
Campaign = warnings to avoid public places + wash their hands
A) ppl washed their hands during the 6 month period
C) ppl avoided public places during the 6 month period
Is A correct because it links part of the cause (campaign/handwashing) to another effect - whereas C doesn't link the campaign to another effect?
When we are strengthen these casual arguments, it's not good enough to just say that the cause occurred in some form, correct? It must always be linked to an effect of similar magnitude as the passage. Right?
No! (C) weakens the argument. If it's true, then it sounds like it was the reduction in public gatherings (and not the campaign!) that caused the reduction in flu.
It's easy to get your head turned around on these. Try to remember that we strengthen by taking away another cause (or, as here, tightening the correlation). We weaken (as (C) does here) by introducing another possible cause.
So the fact there were less public gatherings has nothing to do with the fact that the public health campaign encouraged people to avoid public places. Is that because the answer says "less public gatherings" instead of "more people avoided public places"? I thought it was showing the campaign worked.
Ah! I see!
It might mean that!
You and I looked at the same evidence and reached opposite—but equally valid—conclusions as to its meaning. This fact alone strongly urges us not to choose this choice.
Your interpretation may well be correct! But without being told why there were fewer gatherings, it's equally possible that mine is.
Remember that when you're choosing between two answer choices, think about what makes them different. Here, (A) explicitly makes the connection that you believed you saw implicitly in (C). In order to be correct, (C) would have to actually say your reasoning (because without saying it, it's equally likely that my interpretation is the correct one).
I think the preceding paragraph may be a re-articulation of your analysis from your original question, right?