Q14 - The phrase "certain traits like

[b91302310]

I am confused that why the sentence :" certain traits like herding abiltiy risk being lost among pedigreed dogs" could not function as an example to further make clear traits that the breeder do not try to maintain risk being lost. How to recognize this sentence as a subsidiary conclusion indicated in the correct answer choice B.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT2]

Often, the best way to understand the organization of an argument is to work backwards -- identify the conclusion, then figure out what closest piece gets you to that conclusion, and so on.

For this argument, the conclusion is at the end -- therefore, organizations should get standards X, Y, Z.

What is the reasoning given for this? It comes in the previous sentence -- certain traits risk being lost.

Why is this? Breeders try to maintain only traits specified by pedigree organizations.

We can think of the core as follows

breeders try to maintain only certain traits -- > other traits risk being lost --> therefore, organizations should X, Y, Z.

Notice that the middle statement is a claim that is supported and in turn supports another conclusion. Therefore, it is a subsidiary conclusion used in support of the main one.

[uhdang]

Refresh from 5 years ago

This is a Method of Reasoning question, and specifically asks for a ROLE of a specific statement. We want to identify the structure of the passage. Practicing to identify the CORE really helps me get through this.

Here is the Core:

Pedigreed dogs don’t have other genetic traits than physical appearance specified in standards they’re supposed to follow + Breeders only try to maintain those specified trait
==>
certain traits like herding ability is likely to be lost among pedigreed dogs
==>
Pedigree organizations should set standards requiring working ability in pedigreed dogs classified as working dogs.

@ This is a "Premise => Intermediate Conclusion => Final Conclusion" structure. After identifying the Core, all you have to do is to find an answer choice of an intermediate conclusion.

A) This is a description of a premise with no support. An intermediate conclusion does have a support and a premise of its own.

B) "subsidiary conclusion" is another word for an "intermediate conclusion." So, this is what we're looking for.

C) By characteristic, an intermediate conclusion is there to further support main conclusion. It is usually not an objection nor is it here.

D) This is a description of a main conclusion.

E) Description of a premise or a background information.