utils/exampleexcerpts.py

Assumption_q = f"""

Consider the following example: \n
1. The birth rate in Country X is down this year by 12% compared to last year. The
death rate in Country X has remained stable for several years. Therefore, the
population of Country X is decreasing measurably.
Which of the following is assumed by the author of the argument above? \n
(A) The causes of the declining birthrate in Country X can be discovered
through physician surveys. \n
(B) Statisticians are able to predict future changes in the size of the population
of Country X. \n
(C) Country Y, which has a nearly identical population to Country X, is experiencing
the same population shift as Country X. \n
(D) There was no significant migration into Country X during the time under
discussion. \n
(E) The causes of the declining birthrate in Country X are primarily economic
in nature. \n

"""

Assumption_ans = """

The best answer is D. You might be able to answer the question directly by simply recognizing
the missing piece of evidence and selecting it. However, if you aren’t able to do so,
you can still determine the correct answer by negating whichever answer choices you view
as potentially correct. It is not likely that you will have time to carefully negate each choice
presented. So, you will need to “filter out” choices that you find clearly irrelevant.
Let’s say that you could easily recognize that answer choice C is irrelevant since it
discusses Country Y and, therefore, it can’t possibly be the missing link between the
stated evidence and the stated conclusion, which both involve Country X. Likewise, let’s
say that you could eliminate answer choice B, which is about predicting the future,
whereas the stimulus argument is about the recent past. \n
That leaves answer choices A, D, and E still in contention. Try to negate answer choice
A. You should come up with something like: “The causes of the declining birthrate in
Country X cannot be discovered through physician surveys.” Since physicians play no
part in the stimulus argument, you should recognize that neither the original phrasing
of answer choice A, nor its negation, has any bearing on the relationship between the
evidence and the conclusion stated in the argument. Similarly, negating E with “The
causes of the declining birthrate in Country X are not primarily economic in nature,”
has no impact on the likelihood that the conclusion is valid. However, if you negate
answer choice D, you get “There was significant migration into Country X during the
time under discussion.” This would dramatically call into question the stated conclusion
that the population of Country X is declining measurably. Therefore, answer choice D
must be correct.

"""

Weaken_Strengthen_q = """

Consider the following example: \n
1. More and more computer software that is capable of correcting not just spelling,
but also grammar and punctuation is being developed. Therefore, it is increasingly
unnecessary for working reporters and writers to have a complete knowledge of the
principles of English grammar and punctuation. Consequently, in training journalists,
less emphasis should be placed on the principles of grammar so that students
and professors can concentrate on other important subjects.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given
for the recommendation above? \n
(A) The effective use of software that corrects grammar and punctuation
requires an understanding of grammatical principles. \n
(B) Much of the software that corrects grammar and punctuation is already
in use. \n
(C) Development of more complex ethical guidelines for reporters and writers
has meant that professors and students in journalism schools must allow
time for teaching such issues. \n
(D) Most of the software that is capable of correcting grammar and punctuation
can be run on the types of computers available to most media outlets. \n
(E) The journalism curriculum already requires that journalism students be
familiar with, and able to use, a variety of software packages. \n
"""

Weaken_Strengthen_ans = """
The best answer is A. If journalists must be able to understand the principles of
grammar in order to effectively use the software described, the conclusion of the argument—
that less emphasis should be placed on such principles in journalism school—is
less likely to be true. Answer choices B, D, and E are irrelevant to the argument. Answer
choice C actually strengthens the argument by making the conclusion just slightly more
likely to be true. \n
"""

Conclusion_q = """

Consider the following example: \n
1. Physician: The continued use of this drug to treat patients with a certain disease
cannot be adequately supported by the proposition that any drug that treats the
disease is more effective than no treatment at all. What must also be taken into
account is that this drug is very expensive and has notable side effects.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the physician’s
argument?
(A) The drug is more effective than no treatment at all. \n
(B) The drug is more effective than other forms of treatment for the disease. \n
(C) The drug is more expensive than other forms of treatment for the disease. \n
(D) The drug should not be used to treat the disease unless it is either effective 
or inexpensive. \n
(E) The drug’s possible effectiveness in treating the disease is not sufficient
justification for using it. \n
"""

Conclusion_ans = """
The best answer is E. According to the physician, the fact that the drug might be
somewhat effective is not enough reason to continue to use it. The physician suggests
that other factors beyond mere effectiveness, such as cost and side effects, be considered
when deciding whether to use the drug. Answer choice A is incorrect because, although
it might be inferred from evidence presented in the stimulus, the question stem calls for
the main point of the argument. Answer choices B and C are incorrect because no
comparison is made between the drug and any other form of treatment for the disease. \n
Answer choice D is incorrect because the physician also contends that the side effects of
the drug should be considered when deciding whether to use the drug.
"""

Method_of_Argument_q = """

Consider the following example: \n
1. It is widely accepted that eating sugar can cause weight gain. Indeed, many people
who are susceptible to weight gain report that, in their own experience, eating
large amounts of sugar is invariably followed by a measurable weight gain within a
few days. However, it is likely that common wisdom has confused cause and effect.
Recent studies suggest that hormonal changes associated with stress can cause
weight gain, and there is ample evidence that people who are fond of sugar tend to
eat more of it when they are under stress. 
The argument employs which one of the following argumentative strategies? \n
(A) It cites evidence that questions the accuracy of the evidence advanced in
support of the position that is being called into question. \n
(B) It gives additional evidence that suggests an alternative interpretation of the
evidence offered in support of the position being challenged. \n
(C) It relies upon the superiority of science versus common opinion as a means
of dismissing the relevance of evidence based upon common experience. \n
(D) It shows that the position being challenged is not consistent with cited,
proven factual evidence. \n
(E) It calls into question the intelligence of those who subscribe to a certain
popularly held belief. \n
"""

Method_of_Argument_ans = """
The best answer is B. The additional evidence provided is regarding hormonal
changes causing weight gain; the alternative interpretation of the correlation between
sugar consumption and weight gain is the possibility that both the weight gain and sugar
consumption are, in fact, caused by stress. \n
"""

Principle_q = """

Consider the following example: \n
1. The best way to create a successful party is to visualize the guests discussing it with
friends the next day. The hostess should first decide what aspects of the party will
lead to favorable comments from guests during those conversations and then come
up with refreshments and activities that will actually cause such post-party talk to
occur.
Which one of the following illustrates a principle most similar to that illustrated by
the passage? \n
(A) When planning a vacation, some travelers decide first where they want to
go, and then plan their route. But, for most people, financial issues must
also be taken into account. \n
(B) When landscaping the grounds of a new home, you should start with the
topsoil and then choose your shrubbery and other foliage. \n
(C) Good moviemakers do not extemporaneously film their movies in one or
two days with no script; a movie cannot be separated from the story upon
which it is based. \n
(D) In negotiating an employment contract, the best method is to make as many
outlandish demands as possible and then agree to forgo the most outrageous
of them. \n
(E) To make a great golf shot, you should picture the ball landing where you
want it to land, and then you will be able to line up your body and your club
accordingly. \n
"""
Principle_ans = """
The best answer is E. The underlying principle in the stimulus argument is that it is
best to work backward from a desired result in order to achieve that result. In the stimulus,
the desired result is a successful party. In the correct answer, the desired result is a
great golf shot. Answer choices B, C, and D are incorrect because they work forward
rather than backward. \n
"""

Point_of_Contention_q = """

Consider the following example: \n
1. Jason: The Internet is making more information available to more people than
ever before in history. So, people can simply learn all they need to know without
seeking the advice of experts. \n
Mark: In the past, the need for experts actually increased as the volume of knowledge
increased. Therefore, the Internet will surely increase our dependence on
experts. \n
The dialogue most strongly supports the claim that Jason and Mark disagree with
each other about whether \n
(A) the Internet will contribute significantly to the increase in the spread of
information throughout society \n
(B) the Internet will increase the likelihood that people will seek the advice of
experts when searching for knowledge \n
(C) the Internet makes more information available to more people \n
(D) experts will increase their reliance on the Internet in the future \n
(E) explaining knowledge to specialists can only be accomplished by Internet
experts \n
"""
Point_of_Contention_ans = """
The best answer is B. Jason thinks that experts will become irrelevant because of
direct public access to information. Mark thinks that the opposite will occur.
"""

Role_of_Fact_q = """

Consider the following example: \n
1. Some environmentalists have argued that there are two independently sufficient
justifications for recycling waste materials: one based on economics and the other
based on the aversion to the continued consumption of pristine global resources.
But suppose that recycling were not economically efficient. Then it would be less
clear that an aversion to consuming pristine global resources is enough of a reason
to recycle.
Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the argument
by the supposition that recycling is not economically efficient? \n
(A) It is used to disprove the environmentalist position that we should recycle. \n
(B) It is used to show that the two reasons given by environmentalists are each
individually sufficient. \n
(C) It is used to disprove the claim that recycling is beneficial. \n
(D) It is used to weaken the claim that consumption of pristine resources is
sufficient reason to recycle. \n
(E) It is used to show that there is no sufficient reason for recycling. \n
"""

Role_of_Fact_ans = """
The best answer is D. The author of the argument asks the reader to go along with
the supposition that recycling is not economically efficient in order to show that a mere
aversion to consuming pristine resources might not be a sufficient, independent justification
for recycling after all. Answer choices A, C, and E are incorrect because the argument
does not actually show that there is no support for recycling. Answer choice B is
incorrect because the argument is meant to question the reasons given for recycling, not
to shore up the reasons given by environmentalists. \n
"""

Flaw_q = """

Consider the following example: \n
1. Giant Motors is attempting to dominate the automobile market by promoting its
products with an expensive television advertising campaign. But, the results of recent
surveys reveal that, in the opinion of 85 percent of all consumers, Giant Motors
already dominates the market. Since any product with more than half of all sales in
any given market is already dominant, Giant Motors dominates the market now and
must only preserve its market share in order to continue to dominate its market.
The argument commits which one of the following errors in reasoning? \n
(A) Failing to eliminate the possibility that what seems to be the outcome of a
specific market condition might actually be the cause of the condition \n
(B) Confusing a condition necessary for certain outcome to obtain for a condition
that, alone, is sufficient to assure that result \n
(C) Treating the failure to establish the falsity of a specific claim as tantamount
to showing that such a claim is certainly accurate \n
(D) Accepting evidence that a claim is believed to be true as evidence that the
claim, itself, is actually true \n
(E) Describing the results of a survey that was done in the past as acceptably
predicting future conditions \n
"""
Flaw_ans = """
The best answer is D. The survey results only show the opinions of consumers. The
stimulus argument relies upon those beliefs as fact in concluding that Giant Motors
dominates the automobile market. There is no reason to accept the opinion of
consumers as an accurate measure of Giant Motors’s actual share of the automobile
market. Each of the other answer choices describes an error in reasoning that is irrelevant
to the stimulus argument. \n
"""
Paradox_q = """

Consider the following example: \n
1. Researchers concur with one another on the issue of the harm that can result when
children are exposed to microscopic asbestos fibers. The resulting disease, asbestosis,
is almost always debilitating and even sometimes fatal. Many older school buildings
contain asbestos insulation around hot water pipes and heating ducts because, until
recently, the dangers of asbestos were unknown. Yet, these same researchers also
agree that laws requiring the removal of asbestos from schools could actually lead
to an increased likelihood of exposure to asbestos fibers to the students who attend
those schools.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy
in the researchers’ positions? \n
(A) New insulation materials used instead of asbestos are as potentially harmful
to children as asbestos is. \n
(B) The money that would be spent on the removal of asbestos from schools
could be spent in other ways that would be more likely to increase the
overall health of school children. \n
(C) Other sources of asbestos, such as automobile and household uses, are
responsible for more cases of asbestosis than school-based sources are. \n
(D) Removing the asbestos from older schools disperses a large quantity of
asbestos fibers into the air, where they are more easily inhaled than when
they are left in place around the pipes and ducts. \n
(E) Lead-based paint poses more of a health hazard to children than asbestos
does. \n
"""

Paradox_ans = """
The best answer is D. Answer choice D provides an explanation for the suggestion not
to remove the asbestos. Essentially, this answer boils down to pointing out that the act of
removal itself is more dangerous than simply leaving the hazard in place. Answer choices
A, C, and E are all incorrect because they focus on other potential sources of harm rather
than the apparent conflict between the two positions that the researchers hold simultaneously:
1) that asbestos can cause serious harm, and 2) that it should not be removed from
schools. Answer choice B is incorrect because it focuses on financial issues rather than the
seemingly logical inconsistency inherent in the researchers’ positions. \n
"""

Parallel_Structure_q = """

Consider the following example: \n
1. Murcheson’s drawing of the Lincoln Monument contains several inaccuracies.
Therefore, your attempt to reproduce the drawing of the monument will not be a
very accurate reproduction of the drawing.
Which one of the following is most similar in its flawed reasoning to the flawed
reasoning in the argument above? \n
(A) Katrina’s presentation was made up primarily of fabrications and distortions.
So the video recording made of it cannot be of good quality. \n
(B) An architect who creates a model of an ugly building must necessarily create
an ugly model, unless the sculpture is a distorted representation of the
building. \n
(C) If a puppy’s coloring resembles its mother’s, then if the mother’s fur is curly,
the puppy’s fur must also be curly. \n
(D) Kelly imitated Rory. But, Kelly is different from Rory, so Kelly could not
have imitated Rory very well. \n
(E) Quentin’s second movie is similar to his first. Therefore, his second movie
must be entertaining since his first movie won many awards. \n
"""

Parallel_Structure_ans = """
The best answer is A. The flaw in the stimulus argument is that it concludes that a
reproduction of a flawed reproduction cannot, itself, be an accurate reproduction.
Answer choice A makes the same mistake. In this instance, Murcheson’s drawing and
Katrina’s presentation fill the same role as one another in their respective arguments.
And, video recording of Katrina’s presentation is analogous to the attempted reproduction
in the stimulus argument. Some of the other answer choices are also flawed arguments;
however, they do not share the same structure. \n
"""

example_excerpts = {
    "Assumption": [Assumption_q, Assumption_ans],
    "Weaken_Strengthen": [Weaken_Strengthen_q, Weaken_Strengthen_ans],
    "Conclusion" : [Conclusion_q, Conclusion_ans],
    "Method_of_Argument" : [Method_of_Argument_q, Method_of_Argument_ans], 
    "Principle" : [Principle_q, Principle_ans], 
    "Point_of_Contention" : [Point_of_Contention_q, Point_of_Contention_ans],
    "Role_of_Fact" : [Role_of_Fact_q, Role_of_Fact_ans], 
    "Flaw" : [Flaw_q, Flaw_ans], 
    "Paradox" : [Paradox_q, Paradox_ans], 
    "Parallel_Structure" : [Parallel_Structure_q, Parallel_Structure_ans]
}