Q18 - Which one of the following

[hainanxie]

Anyone please help with Answer A.

I couldnt understand why A is better than B, even though either of them is strongly supporting the stem.

Thank you.

[aileenann]

Since the question is asking which one "most strongly" supports the conclusion, we are going to realize that there might be more than one answer that supports the conclusion but that one answer will clearly be more directly relevant either directly to the conclusion or to a dubious premise that needs strong buttressing. Here the conclusion is, "Such service cuts might cost the PTA more in lost fares than they would save in costs." Notice that "Thus" at the beginning of the third sentence is actually a trick in the sense that it does not introduce the final statement in the logical flow of the argument. If you don't see why, try the Therefore Test on this one.

Let's look first at (A).

(A) Over 23 percent of the round trips made by PTA riders are either initiated or else completed during late"‘night periods.

(A) strengthens a premise that many night riders are people who also take the transportation during the day. Indeed, it tells us that a signification portion of all riders are those who complete part of their ride at night. It further suggests that up to 23% of all round trips might stop for the logic suggested in the argument - a non-trivial percentage.

Now let's look at (B).

(B) Reliable survey results show that over 43 percent of the PTA's riders oppose any cut in PTA services.

(B) tells us that PTA riders do not want any cut in services. But remember, Ping's original argument was all about the bottom line (as was Winston's) - the decision to cut night rides will have little to do with whether riders want the cut or not, since the PTA is above all interested in profit. The PTA must not operate at a deficit, regardless of what their customers want! I would actually say that (B) is neutral (or strengthens a teeny tiny amount) over all and does not strengthen Ping's conclusion very much.

I hope this helps. If you have more questions about this problem or about strengthen questions in general, feel free to follow-up!

[hainanxie]

Since the question is asking which one "most strongly" supports the conclusion, we are going to realize that there might be more than one answer that supports the conclusion but that one answer will clearly be more directly relevant either directly to the conclusion or to a dubious premise that needs strong buttressing. Here the conclusion is, "Such service cuts might cost the PTA more in lost fares than they would save in costs." Notice that "Thus" at the beginning of the third sentence is actually a trick in the sense that it does not introduce the final statement in the logical flow of the argument. If you don't see why, try the Therefore Test on this one.

Let's look first at (A).

(A) Over 23 percent of the round trips made by PTA riders are either initiated or else completed during late"‘night periods.

(A) strengthens a premise that many night riders are people who also take the transportation during the day. Indeed, it tells us that a signification portion of all riders are those who complete part of their ride at night. It further suggests that up to 23% of all round trips might stop for the logic suggested in the argument - a non-trivial percentage.

Now let's look at (B).

(B) Reliable survey results show that over 43 percent of the PTA's riders oppose any cut in PTA services.

(B) tells us that PTA riders do not want any cut in services. But remember, Ping's original argument was all about the bottom line (as was Winston's) - the decision to cut night rides will have little to do with whether riders want the cut or not, since the PTA is above all interested in profit. The PTA must not operate at a deficit, regardless of what their customers want! I would actually say that (B) is neutral (or strengthens a teeny tiny amount) over all and does not strengthen Ping's conclusion very much.

I hope this helps. If you have more questions about this problem or about strengthen questions in general, feel free to follow-up!

I agree with your explanation of answer B that only offers little amount but not necessarily warrants Ping's conclusion if main conclusion rests in the first sentence instead of the second.

However, I still think Ping's conclusion rest in the second sentence. Therefore Test should be used when sequence of premises and conclusion is opaque but not for justifying possible illogical reasoning existing in the question stem. Although I dont following Ping's logic, it seems true to me the second sentence leaded by "Thus" could be used as a conclusion respectfully. The whole structure per my perspective is that the second sentence as main conclusion is supported by subsidiary conclusion, the first half of the first sentence, which is supported by the second half of the first sentence.

Obviously, I fell for the "Thus" trick, didnt I? I'd like to hear your opinion about it. Thank you very much.

[cyruswhittaker]

"Thus" actually presents an intermediate conclusion, supported by the second part of sentence one following "for..." and supporting the first part of sentence one, which is the overall position that Ping is asserting.

[WaltGrace1983]

Can someone explain why simply strengthening a premise is adequate for strengthening the conclusion/argument etc.? What makes this question different because I have heard that strengthening the premise is not a good tactic for strengthen questions?

Here is how I see the argument:
PTA would lose riders who leave home during the day but return at night
(→)
PTA would lose two fares while saving costs of only one
→
Service cuts might cost more than save

Two questions:
(1) Is there something I am missing here? The correct answer is just giving a statistic to validate Premise 1.
(2) Is there a gap between P1 and P2? Would the gap be that, knowing that they will be unable to ride back at night, people will not be taking PTA lines to their destination? I mean we know that they won't be able to ride back but who's to say that the PTA will lose two fares? Couldn't they just lose one fare?

Any help is appreciated. Thanks!

[maryadkins]

Can someone explain why simply strengthening a premise is adequate for strengthening the conclusion/argument etc.? What makes this question different because I have heard that strengthening the premise is not a good tactic for strengthen questions?

True, but you're always looking for the answer that most strongly supports the argument. In this case, the other 4 choices are clearly wrong. (A) is the only one that even comes close.

And to your other question:

Is there a gap between P1 and P2? Would the gap be that, knowing that they will be unable to ride back at night, people will not be taking PTA lines to their destination? I mean we know that they won't be able to ride back but who's to say that the PTA will lose two fares? Couldn't they just lose one fare?

Yes, there is this gap. It doesn't matter much here. (A) is still the only one that strengthens.