Q12 - Novel X and Novel Y are both

[dan]

12. (D)
Question Type: Analyze Argument Structure
The argument starts with background information and an opposing point (the novels are similar, so plagiarism might be involved), but then pivots to the author’s main conclusion with the word "however." The author concludes that it’s probably not plagiarism, but rather coincidence. The author then supports his/her conclusion with a supporting premise at the end of the argument. This is a very common argument structure: OPPOSING POINT --- CONCLUSION --- SUPPORTING PREMISE. Answer (D) correctly expresses the main conclusion.

(A) restates some of the background information given for the argument.
(B) restates the opposing point.
(C) restates the supporting premise.
(E) gives a cause/effect relationship that does not accurately represent the conclusion made in the passage.


#officialexplanation

[b91302310]

Hi ,

Regarding the answer choice (E), could anyone explain why it is a cause/effect relationship rather than the conditional reasoning ?

Thanks.

[noah]

Regarding the answer choice (E), could anyone explain why it is a cause/effect relationship rather than the conditional reasoning ?

A cause/effect relationship is a type of conditional reasoning (unless I'm missing what you mean by that). (E) can be represented as

authors have similar backgrounds and lives --> suspicions of plagiarism probably unwarranted

The argument has the same conclusion as the necessary side of that relationship, however, the conclusion is not the entire relationship - it's that the similarities in the books are probably coincidental.

Analogously:
People say that my cat is mean-spirited. But, he is scared of strangers, so it's more likely that they've misinterpreted his actions.

The conclusion is in red, the premise is in blue. The conclusion is not if my cat is scared, people have misinterpreted my actions, instead, the conclusion is that it's more likely that they've misinterpreted his actions.

Make sense?

[b91302310]

Thanks for the logic! When solving this question, I eliminated this choice just because it is conditional reasoning which is a different method of reasoning from the argument in the stimulus. However, now I understand better why this is wrong.

[AlexY297]

Hi, I had a hard time between D and E. They seem so close in saying the same thing differently.

[ohthatpatrick]

When you do ID the Conclusion, your reading goal is to find and bracket the conclusion.

The common trend on ID the Conclusion questions is that the conclusion comes earlier than the Premise(s).

An even more specific trend is that on most of these, the conclusion is some sort of rebuttal coming from the author against some other point of view. The author's conclusion is usually prefaced by some "but / yet / however" pivot point.

Both things happen here. We'd bracket off "It is more likely that the similarity .... is coincidental".

When searching for the most equivalent meaning, (D) is a better match than (E) for at least a few reasons.

1. the claim we bracketed is comparative, not conditional. (D) is comparative, whereas (E) is conditional.

2. "VERY LIKELY to be unwarranted" is a strong statement. The author just said that one suspicion is more compelling than other. That doesn't mean that the less likely suspicion is VERY LIKELY to be unwarranted.

3. Finally, (E) doesn't mention "coincidental"! The conclusion we bracketed has our author supplying us with a different explanation for the background fact: it's a coincidence. (E) is only concerned with shooting down someone else's explanation. It doesn't convey the fact that the author actually supplied an alternative explanation of her own.

Hope this helps.