Q17 - Meteorologist: Heavy downpours

[smiller]

Question Type:
Determine the Function

Stimulus Breakdown:
The first sentence contains the argument's conclusion. The rest of the stimulus consists of the argument's premises, which link together to support the conclusion.

Answer Anticipation:
The statement described in the question stem is the last sentence of the stimulus, which is one of the premises.

Correct Answer:
(D)

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) The statement in the question stem is not the conclusion of the argument.

(B) The statement in the question stem is not the conclusion of the argument.

(C) This answer describes an intermediate, or supporting, conclusion. This isn't how the statement in the question stem functions. The other premises explain how a warmer atmosphere leads to larger clouds. For (C) to be correct, these premises would have to provide evidence for the additional claim that water vapor condensing in larger clouds is likely to result in heavy downpours. The other premises aren't attempting to support this. The last sentence in the stimulus is presented as an additional, separate fact, a stand-alone premise, not a conclusion supported by other premises.

(D) This is correct. The statement in the question stem is a premise, and supports the argument's only conclusion.

(E) This misrepresents the function of the statement in the question stem. It does, in fact, provide support for the conclusion.

Takeaway/Pattern: We use the terms "premise" and "intermediate conclusion" to describe two elements of an argument that are related, but function differently. Both serve as support for the final, main conclusion of an argument. However, an intermediate conclusion receives support from other parts of the argument, while a premise does not. This difference becomes important in many Determine the Function questions.

#officialexplanation

[marykatemoller]

Could someone explain why (D) is a better answer choice than (C)? I was deciding between the two and ended up choosing (C).

[tungj]

The only viable answers are C and D for this question.

If you were able to identify the first sentence as the conclusion, you should see the remaining three sentences are premises strung together to support the conclusion. The logic would be something like "this happens, then that happens, then this results".

D is correct because the role of the sentence is to support the conclusion.

C was tempting as the sentence in question was not the conclusion but it does support something. The question is: is it supporting something or is it being supported by something. The premises do lead to one another so you probably thought that satisfies the part of "It is a statement that the argument is intended to support..." But be careful as that statement usually refers to a conclusion or an intermediate conclusion.

[maryadkins]

Great explanation! Thanks for it.

To elaborate a bit more, yes, exactly, the part that makes (C) wrong is that it says "a statement that the argument is intended to support."

This would mean the argument as a WHOLE supports IT, not the other way around. Since its role is to support the conclusion, this would not be an accurate way of describing what's going on.

The argument is:

warm atmosphere --> faster evaporation --> faster rain cloud formation --> larger clouds --> heavier downpours

ALL SUPPORTING the first sentence CONCLUSION:

warm atmosphere --> more heavy downpours

(The part in bold is the part we're concerned with"”notice it's only a piece of the entire argument.)

As for the others, this means (A) and (B) are out and (E) doesn't make sense (it does support the conclusion).

[mornincounselor]

Why does it have to be either entirely support, or entirely a conclusion?

Don't we often see subsidiary conclusions which are both supported by parts of an argument and in turn help to support the main conclusion? I'm not saying it applies for this question but there certainly are sentences that do this right?

I guess in practice I tend to isolate the main conclusion and not really compartmentalize the remainder of the argument into back ground vs support, or support vs supporting sub-conclusion. I don't remember missing other questions due to this imperfect understanding, but this one sure got me.

[tommywallach]

Hey Mornin,

You're absolutely right on the first count, with a caveat.

It's possible for something to be a subsidiary conclusion that supports a final conclusion. But when push comes to shove, that subsidiary conclusion really SHOULD NOT be thought of as a "conclusion," because it's primary goal in the argument IS as support.

As to your second point, I can't agree with that one. Differentiating between base premises, secondary conclusions, and the final conclusion is critical for a small but statistically relevant subset of questions (match the argument, for example, or explain the role, or even just a really complex strengthen or weaken), so it's worth doing.

Hope that helps!

-t

[daijob]

So just want to double check...C is kind of saying "intermediate conclusion" right?
(It is not he conclusion as a whole, but there are statements supporting.)

[tommywallach]

Indeed.

[YT]

I am confused a bit with the explanations above on why (C) is wrong. I see two possible reasons why (C) is wrong:

1) The claim "In general, as water vapor in larger clouds condenses, heavier downpours are more likely to result" is an intermediary conclusion, but "a statement that the argument is intended to support" is a description which can only be used for FINAL conclusions. That's why (C) is wrong.

2) As well as "a statement the argument is intended to support" can be used for intermediary conclusions, the claim is not an intermediary conclusion.

I would be glad to know which one is right. Thanks.

[jeanne'sjean]

I am confused a bit with the explanations above on why (C) is wrong. I see two possible reasons why (C) is wrong:

1) The claim "In general, as water vapor in larger clouds condenses, heavier downpours are more likely to result" is an intermediary conclusion, but "a statement that the argument is intended to support" is a description which can only be used for FINAL conclusions. That's why (C) is wrong.

2) As well as "a statement the argument is intended to support" can be used for intermediary conclusions, the claim is not an intermediary conclusion.

I would be glad to know which one is right. Thanks.

Same question

Could somebody help this one?

[Lisaandpeterlin]

Great explanation! Thanks for it.

To elaborate a bit more, yes, exactly, the part that makes (C) wrong is that it says "a statement that the argument is intended to support."

This would mean the argument as a WHOLE supports IT, not the other way around. Since its role is to support the conclusion, this would not be an accurate way of describing what's going on.

The argument is:

warm atmosphere --> faster evaporation --> faster rain cloud formation --> larger clouds --> heavier downpours

ALL SUPPORTING the first sentence CONCLUSION:

warm atmosphere --> more heavy downpours

(The part in bold is the part we're concerned with"”notice it's only a piece of the entire argument.)

As for the others, this means (A) and (B) are out and (E) doesn't make sense (it does support the conclusion).

So - question - would that mean that - that particular answer choice would always be wrong? For example - its like it's negating itself. It starts off as saying its the main conclusion - and then goes to say it's not the main conclusion. Am I following this correctly?

[ohthatpatrick]

I think you're right. As written, it's an impossible answer. It's like a snake eating its own tail.

If the answer said,
"it's a claim that the argument intends to support", then I think we can interpret that to mean
THERE WAS AT LEAST ONE IDEA THAT SUPPORTS THIS CLAIM WITHIN THE ARGUMENT

but when it says
"it's a claim that the argument is intended to support", then I hear it like Mary, to mean
THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT IS INTENDED TO SUPPORT THIS CLAIM

By definition, the Main Conclusion is the claim that the entire argument is intended to support.

In either case, I've never seen "this type" of answer before, so you probably won't get much out of memorizing a takeaway like "never pick this type of answer". But if you understand why it's sort of an illogical sounding answer, that's good.