Q10 - A new process enables

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Determine the Function (describe the role played)

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: Being able to fortify table salt with iron could help the world to combat anemia caused by iron deficiency.
Evidence: People all over the world use salt, and they use enough of it that they'd actually get a bunch of iron in their diet this way.

Answer Anticipation:
They're asking us about the last idea, which was the 2nd premise. You can pretty much always tell that two ideas connected by the word "and" will be premises. "And" connects two things that are on the same level. When there is more than one premise, and the stem asks us about the role of one of those premises, they often like to refer to that role as "providing PARTIAL support".

Correct Answer:
B

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) Nope. The 2nd sentence is the conclusion.

(B) YES! It's a premise.

(C) Nope. It supports the author. The author is not going AGAINST it.

(D) No, "qualify" means "to narrow the scope or applicability of a claim". It GOES against a claim, when you qualify it. f.e. Unqualified claim: "I hate spicy food". Qualified claim: "I hate spicy food, except for spicy Indian food."

(E) There's not really a principle under this very practical argument. And the final claim in the argument is definitely not illustrating a principle; it's not a specific example of a general rule.

Takeaway/Pattern: The hardest part of this probably just finding the Conclusion. Like finding the Conclusion on ID the Conc questions, finding it on Determine Function questions usually involves upside-down arguments: we'll see the conclusion first, and THEN the author will support or unpack that claim. This paragraph has a frequently used structure in Conclusion / Determine Function questions:
1. Background fact for context
2. Conclusion (signified by some opinion indicator, like "probably", or by virtue of it being a prediction)
3. Premise 1, and Premise 2.

#officialexplanation

[cdjmarmon]

I got the answer right but I am curious what D means by, "It qualifies the conclusion of the argument."

I dont even know what that means.

[ohthatpatrick]

"Qualifying" a statement is basically restricting its scope to only apply to a specific subset of instances.

Or, in English ...

say that I said "I hate summer sports", but then I realized that the Summer Olympics are happening this summer, and I do enjoy them.

I might qualify my previous statement by saying, "I hate summer sports, in any non-Olympics year."

It's not the sense of "qualified" we mean when we talk about someone applying for a job.

It's the sense of having a disclaimer, reservation, exception to the rule, etc.

You might see an Attitude/Tone question in Reading Comp in which the author's attitude might be

(B) unqualified admiration
i.e., the author was COMPLETELY in love with something and expressed no misgivings (thoroughly unlikely to be correct)

or

(C) qualified endorsement
i.e., the author overall has a positive attitude towards someone/something but expressed some reservation or misgiving about that subject (very common type of correct answer)

Hope this helps. Let me know if it elicits any questions.

[jardinsouslapluie5]

Could you explain what (E) would be look like?
I thought principle is "ppl consume salt ~"which underlies the conclusion....
Thank you.

[rinagoldfield]

Hey guys, here's the diagram and solution that I developed as part of my curriculum training to become a Manhattan LSAT instructor. Hope it helps!