Q21 - Baumgartner’s comparison of the environmental hazards

[charmayne.palomba]

PT46, S3, Q21 (Analyze Argument (identify the conclusion))

(A) is correct.

We always want to start by identifying the conclusion of an argument, and in this question type, that’s our entire job. Of course the conclusion will be worded a bit differently in the answer choice, but we don’t want to approach the answer choices until we have identified the conclusion as it’s written in the argument. We’re told that Baumgartner has made a misleading comparison about the relative environmental impacts of gasoline-powered and electric cars, because he is only considering the cars’ production, rather than total life cycles. As we read, we want to see how that claim fits in with the rest of the argument. Is it supporting another statement? Is it backed up by the premises? We learn that Baumgartner only examines one factor of environmental impact"”production"”and that, in fact, a gasoline-powered car consumes more resources and creates more pollution.

Taken together, those statements are premises that support the final claim"”our conclusion"”that Baumgartner has made a misleading comparison, and (A) says that"”the only difference is that his comparison is described as "deceptive" instead of "misleading." We might nitpick and say that in order to call Baumgartner deceptive, we’d have to know that he was being intentionally misleading"”and we don’t know that for sure"”but this is by far the most accurate expression of the conclusion. So (A) is the correct answer.

(B) is tempting if we let ourselves think outside the text. It seems likely that the author’s criticism of Baumgartner’s comparison would be leading to a conclusion that the environmental hazards of gas-powered cars are greater than that of electric cars. But does the author actually say that? No! He just says that Baumgartner’s comparison is incomplete, and therefore misleading. Be careful to choose the answer that accurately reflects what the author’s conclusion is"”not what you’d expect it to be.

(C) The author isn’t questioning the accuracy of the data Baumgartner uses. Instead, he is criticizing Baumgartner for citing incomplete data.

(D) This is a premise of the argument. Since the total life cycle is what matters when assessing environmental impact, and Baumgartner only considers production, his comparison is misleading.

(E) This is tempting, because it seems like this is where the author is going with the argument. But be careful to stay within the bounds of the stimulus"”the author never actually claims that Baumgartner’s conclusions are wrong. In fact, we don’t actually know what Baumgartner concludes at all. We might assume that Baumgartner concludes that the environmental impact of electric cars is greater than that of gasoline-powered cars, and that the author disagrees, but we can’t make that jump.

[jamiejames]

due to this question being #21, I went ahead and over thought the question way too much, because I couldn't believe that the answer was as simple as A, but then I remembered that if a "what's the conclusion" question contains the conclusion as an answer, almost verbatim (with a word change or two,) as long as there isn't too big a leap, it's right. Anyway, just in case anyone else had the problem of trying to over think the answer, you weren't alone

[nflamel69]

the shift from misleading to deceptive definitely bothered me since this is #21 on the test. but after going through ACs twice, i gave up and went with A. ahhh!!! quit messing with my head LSAC!