Chapter 6

Analyzing the Argument Questions

In This Chapter

arrow Tackling Argument Analysis questions step-by-step

arrow Reading the passage analytically

arrow Discovering what the question is asking for

arrow Thinking up your own answer before choosing one

arrow Picking the correct answer by the process of elimination

You’ve probably heard the old expression, “You can’t believe everything you hear.” That’s what argument analysis is all about — questioning arguments you read in books, magazines, newspapers, and on the web; assertions made on the nightly news; claims made by politicians; advertising pitches; and so on. Graduate schools expect you not only to read with understanding but also to scrutinize information and arguments and sort out what’s true and reasonable from what’s not.

An Argument Analysis question challenges you to identify the author’s stance on a particular issue and determine whether the author has done a sufficient job of presenting and supporting his position. This chapter reveals what to look for in the argument and the question and answer choices that follow it. This chapter also explains how to deconstruct an argument to determine whether it’s logically sound and well supported.

remember.eps When taking the GRE, expect two Argument Analysis questions in each Verbal section. Each question consists of a short argument followed by one question and five answer choices. These arguments are easy to spot because they always present a plan or a conclusion based on a set of facts. In this chapter, you learn how to deconstruct the argument based on the facts given.

Use this five-step approach to tackle an Argument Analysis question:

1. Cover the answer choices with your scratch paper.

2. Read the question and understand what it’s asking you to do.

3. Read the passage, keeping an eye out for information you need to answer the question.

4. Answer the question in your own words.

5. Eliminate wrong answer choices to reveal the right one.

This chapter leads you through this five-step process and transforms you into a critical thinker, if you’re not one already.

Covering the Answer Choices

First, cover the answer choices with your scrap paper. Although doing so may look peculiar to your fellow examinees, using this strategy improves your GRE score and can give you a higher score than theirs. Doing this also improves your chances of answering the questions correctly, because the answer choices clutter your brain and muddle your thinking with superfluous (nonessential) information.

By covering the answers, you can focus on establishing the gist of the argument before looking over the answer choices. With a solid understanding of the argument, any irrelevant answer choices become more obvious and easier to rule out.

Knowing What to Look for in the Question

While keeping the answer choices covered, read and understand what the question asks, so you know what to look for as you read the answer choices. Each question typically asks you to pick the choice that does one of the following:

check.png Most seriously weakens the argument or something in it

check.png Adds the best support to strengthen the argument or something in it

check.png Draws the most reasonable conclusion from the passage

check.png Identifies the assumption that must be true for the argument to be true

check.png Most accurately represents the premise on which the argument is based

remember.eps The questions may not use the actual wording provided here; for example, instead of asking which choice most seriously weakens the argument, a question may ask which choice most effectively undermines the argument. Don’t get caught up in semantics. Just realize that questions may be worded differently, so be sure you understand what the question is asking.

Reading the Passage with a Critical Eye

By knowing what the question is asking, as explained in the previous section, you’re better equipped to play the role of active reader — one who reads with a purpose. Instead of just reading the words, active and critical readers go in asking questions, such as “What’s the main idea?” “What would strengthen this argument?” “What would weaken this argument?” and “What’s this passage implying?” Reading the question first, as I discuss in the preceding section, guides this critical reading step by suggesting what you should be asking.

When you read actively, you ask these questions and more, which help you gain a deeper understanding of the material and improve your retention of it. On the GRE, however, active reading is guided, because the exam gives you the one question you need to answer, and you read it before reading the argument.

The following sections provide guidance on what to look for in a passage to answer different types of Argument Analysis questions.

Identifying the premise and conclusion

Think of a logical argument as an if-then statement: The if part is the premise, and the then part is the conclusion. When a question asks you to identify the conclusion or choose a statement that most effectively challenges or supports the argument, break it down into premise and conclusion.

Officially, the premise and conclusion are as follows:

check.png Premise: The premise (the if part) is facts or reasons that support the conclusion, including observations, statistics, reasonable generalizations, or anecdotes.

check.png Conclusion: The conclusion (the then part) is the argument’s or author’s main point, assertion, or opinion.

After identifying the premise and conclusion, you have what you need to begin your argument analysis, as explained in the next few sections.

example_gre.eps A strong selling point for charter schools has been their lower cost. Because charter schools receive no public funding for building schools, they cannot afford to build expensive facilities of their own. Instead, they have had to develop cost-effective classroom solutions, such as renting office space and storefronts. The current bill would make public funding available to charter schools for capital investments. Therefore, if the bill passes, charter schools will be able to start using public funding for building facilities, making them much less cost-effective.

To reduce this argument to an if-then statement, you may come up with something like this:

If public funding is made available to charter schools, then they will no longer be cost-effective.

This single, simple restatement of the argument helps you evaluate the answer choices without having to reread the entire passage. If the question asks something about the conclusion or the main point that the passage makes, look to the then part of the statement. If the question asks you to choose a statement that challenges or supports the argument, try each answer choice until you find the one that most effectively challenges or supports the if part of the statement.

tip.eps Look for the following words to identify the conclusion: then, therefore, thus, hence, so, consequently, as a result, and in conclusion. However, don’t rely solely on these words; they may be implied rather than stated.

Finding the hidden assumption

An assumption is a claim the passage makes without stating it directly. The assumption either plugs a gap in logic between the premise and conclusion or narrows the gap so you can reach only one reasonable conclusion. When asked to identify an assumption, look for the answer choice that must be true for the argument to be true. When reading each answer choice, ask yourself, “Could the argument still be true if this were false?” If your answer is no, you most likely found the right choice, but read through the other choices, as explained later in this chapter, just to be sure.

Unfortunately, identifying an assumption by just looking at the passage is difficult, because you’re trying to see what’s missing — what’s not there. So if you encounter a question that looks something like one of the following, look for a logical gap in the passage, which typically stands between the premise and the conclusion:

check.png Which of the following is an assumption . . . ?

check.png . . . relies on which of the following assumptions?

check.png . . . is based on which of the following assumptions?

Here’s an example for finding a hidden assumption in a passage:

example_gre.eps Women have been fighting for equal employment opportunities and pay for decades now, but have yet to achieve parity in the workplace. To achieve gender parity in the workplace, hiring quotas must be enacted and strictly enforced.

First, identify the premise and conclusion, the if-then statement:

check.png Premise: Women have been fighting for equal opportunities and pay without results.

check.png Conclusion: Hiring quotas are needed.

Between the premise and the conclusion is the assumption that gender bias exists in the workplace. The assumption isn’t stated in the passage, but you can infer it from the premise and conclusion. The assumption also passes the test for qualifying as a bona fide assumption, because if it were false, the argument would be false, too.

Spotting weaknesses in supporting details

Arguments contain supporting details, usually facts, statistics, examples, or expert opinions. When you encounter a question that asks you to identify which statement, if true, undermines or supports the argument, you probably need to evaluate supporting details both in the premise and in the answer choices. As you read the passage, pay special attention and look for weaknesses or inaccuracies in the supporting details as well as the conclusion drawn from them.

To choose the correct answer choice that weakens an argument, look for the choice that does one or both of the following:

check.png Contradicts or calls into question one of the supporting details in the passage

check.png Highlights the disconnect in the passage between the supporting details and the conclusion

example_gre.eps According to the USDA, ethanol production will consume 40 percent of this year’s corn harvest, meaning that about 5 billion bushels of corn will be used for fuel instead of food. With global drought and weather-related food shortages occurring in countries all over the world, prices for cereal, meat, and other staples are likely to soar in the U.S., while people in many poorer countries will go hungry. To make up for the shortfall in this year’s harvest, lifting of the federal government’s mandates on ethanol production has become a moral imperative.

When you read a passage like this that’s packed with details, jot them down on your scratch paper followed by the conclusion:

check.png Premises: Forty percent of corn is used to produce fuel, not food; global drought; global food prices will rise.

check.png Conclusion: Federal mandates on ethanol production must be lifted.

If the question asks you to choose a statement that best undermines the argument, examine the choices to find the one that does the best job of contradicting a supporting detail or showing that one or more of the supporting details isn’t responsible for what’s stated in the conclusion. For example, if the global drought affected other foods but not corn, and a surplus of corn existed with enough for both the planned ethanol production and the existing food channels, then the plan to use 40 percent of corn for fuel wouldn’t significantly affect the price of food.

On the other hand, if the question asks you to choose the statement that adds the best support for the argument, look for the choice that most effectively supports the conclusion that lifting the federal government’s mandates on ethanol production would increase the availability of food for human consumption. For example, pointing out that the U.S. is responsible for nearly 70 percent of the world’s corn exports and that ethanol production is likely to consume 20 percent of the total U.S. corn crop would be pretty solid evidence that ethanol production is likely to contribute to food shortages.

Exploring common logical fallacies

Arguments may seem logical and fair on the surface but actually be fallacious (erroneous, flawed). The following sections reveal some of the more common logical fallacies you’re likely to find on the exam. By spotting such fallacies, you identify weaknesses in arguments and gather the knowledge required to determine which statements best support or refute the argument.

Circular reasoning

In circular reasoning, a premise supports a premise or a conclusion supports a conclusion. For example, a statement such as, “The United States is the greatest country in the world, because no other country comes close,” is an example of circular reasoning — trying to support the conclusion with another conclusion. Another example is, “Most dentists prefer this toothpaste because four out of five dentists prefer it,” which is supporting a premise with a premise; in this case, the conclusion merely restates the premise.

traps%26tricks.eps Watch out for circular reasoning in answer choices when the question asks you to choose a statement that supports an argument. Circular reasoning statements are easy to spot because they restate information that’s already in the argument.

Erroneous cause-and-effect arguments

Erroneous cause-and-effect arguments come in several styles. The most common is often referred to in Latin as post hoc ergo propter hoc, meaning “after this, therefore because of this.” You don’t need to memorize the Latin terminology; however, do remember that just because one event follows another doesn’t mean the first event caused the second event. For example, if a cigarette-tax increase were to be followed by a decrease in the per-capita rate of smoking, you can’t assume that one caused the other. A third event may have also occurred that brought the outcome. If the cigarette-tax increase happened at the same time as the release of a new, shocking report detailing the dangers of smoking, then the report, not the tax increase, may have caused the reduction in smoking.

Sweeping generalizations

A sweeping generalization applies a general rule to a specific case, such as a plan that works in one context will certainly work in another. For example, someone may argue that because the addition of sharp-turn warning signs to roads in Town X reduced the rate of accidents, adding these signs to the roads in Town Y will surely have the same effect. This argument uses a sweeping generalization by assuming that the roads in the two towns are similar. To weaken this argument, the correct answer choice may suggest that Town X has lots of curvy mountain roads while Town Y has only straight, flat roads. Because sharp-turn warning signs don’t make straight roads safer, this new information weakens the argument.

More logical fallacies

The GRE doesn’t require an ability to identify logical fallacies (or the Latin names for them), but being aware of such fallacies and looking for them in real examples is a great way to exercise your brain and avoid being taken in by faulty logic. This chapter introduces a few of the most common logical fallacies you can expect to encounter on the test, but plenty more exist, including the following:

check.png Ad hominem: Latin for “against the man,” an ad hominem argument attacks the person instead of what the person says. For example, if an investment advisor comes on the news and says that investors should buy gold as a hedge against inflation, and another analyst replies, “You don’t even have a bachelor’s degree in economics,” the second analyst is arguing ad hominem by attacking the person and not the advice to buy gold.

check.png Red herring: A red herring is any attempt to stray from the issue. For example, suppose two people are discussing the pros and cons of nuclear energy, and one person says something like, “Sure, nuclear energy is a clean, efficient source of power, but the atomic bomb has the potential of wiping out entire cities.” This red herring takes the debate in an entirely different direction, shifting the focus from nuclear power to nuclear warfare.

check.png Straw man fallacy: The straw man fallacy intentionally distorts the opponent’s position and then attacks the distorted position instead of attacking what the person actually said. Suppose two politicians are discussing the state budget. The first politician says, “By combining these three health agencies, the state can save 25 percent in funding annually.” The second politician replies, “Slashing funding for healthcare actually costs more money than it saves.” The second politician has committed the straw man fallacy by misrepresenting the first politician’s position and then attacking it.

check.png Either/or fallacy: The either/or fallacy, sometimes called a false dilemma or black-and-white thinking, presents two options as the only available ones, even though neither option may be correct and other options may exist. Suppose a committee is discussing the future of its parent-teacher organization, and one of the committee members says, “If we decide to stop fundraising, we may as well not have a parent-teacher organization.” The either/or fallacy here is based on the premise that the sole function of a parent-teacher organization is to raise money for the schools, when in fact other functions exist, such as increasing levels of volunteerism and improving communication between parents and schools.

Answering the Question in Your Own Words

After you have a clear understanding of the argument’s premise and conclusion, answer the question in your own words, giving the answer choices less power to lead you astray. Fortunately, the question serves as your focal point. For example, if the question asks you to identify the assumption, you needn’t waste time considering whether the argument commits a logical fallacy or evaluating evidence that may support or undermine the argument — you focus solely on the assumption.

Following are the different question types and what you need to ask yourself and answer before looking at the answer choices:

check.png Weaken the argument: What new information that’s not in the argument would weaken it? Does the argument commit a logical fallacy? If so, which one?

check.png Strengthen the argument: What new information that’s not in the argument would strengthen it?

check.png Identify the assumption: What assumption does the author make that if you could prove untrue would prove the conclusion false?

check.png Identify the inference: Based on the supporting details, what point is the author trying to make?

check.png Choose the best conclusion: What is the author’s stand on this issue?

traps%26tricks.eps Don’t review the answer choices before answering the question in your own words. Just as with the Text Completion and Sentence Equivalence questions discussed in Chapter 4, if you read the choices first, they may muddle your understanding of the passage and the question.

Eliminating Wrong Answers to Find the Right One

Like the other verbal questions on the GRE, answering the Argument Analysis questions means eliminating the obviously wrong answers and working with what’s left. After you’ve answered the question yourself, look at each answer choice and eliminate those that don’t match your own answer. The following sections show you how to eliminate wrong answers and also highlight some common traps to avoid.

Leveraging the process of elimination

GRE developers are a tricky bunch. They seem to take pleasure in intentionally misleading test-takers. To defend yourself against this chicanery (trickery intended to deceive), brush up on the most common traps.

Beware of “always,” “never,” and other absolutes

Absolute answers — those containing the words always, never, must, all, or none — are almost always wrong, so you can red flag them for elimination more quickly than the other choices. You may not always be able to eliminate answer choices that contain absolutes, but this strategy works often enough to narrow your choices if you’re stuck.

Dodge the decoys

On the GRE, an argument may contain information that’s irrelevant to answering the question. When that occurs, chances are that at least one of the answer choices mentions that irrelevant information. Answering the question yourself before looking at the answer choices makes any of these irrelevant answers easier to spot.

Stay dispassionate

Correct answer choices are usually unbiased and tone neutral. If an answer choice seems emotional or opinionated, it’s probably a prime candidate for elimination. If you can’t eliminate the answer choice right off the bat, scrutinize it closely before choosing it.

Avoid picking an answer just because it’s true

Don’t choose an answer just because it’s true. Plenty of answer choices are true, but they fail to address the question. When you see an answer choice that’s true, make sure it answers the question and is supported in the passage before choosing it.

Don’t be tempted by opposites

If the question asks you to choose an answer choice that most effectively weakens or adds support to the argument, the answer choices almost always contain at least one statement that does the exact opposite. It may make sense, because it contains the elements that you’re looking for, but make sure it goes in the right direction; if you’re strengthening an argument, for example, this wrong answer may seem to fit perfectly but actually weaken the argument.

Testing your skills

Here’s a sample question to test your skills, followed by the best approach for choosing the right answer.

Recent test scores released by Washington D.C.’s department of education show a four-point drop in reading proficiency in its elementary schools from the previous year to 44.5 percent. Math proficiency dropped 5 points to 43.4 percent. Washington D.C.’s public school system is obviously failing in its mission to improve academic success.

example_gre.eps The argument that Washington D.C.’s public school system is failing to improve academic success is based on which of the following assumptions?

A Washington D.C.’s public school system doesn’t have sufficient funding to improve test scores.

B Proficiency rates are the same at the middle- and high-school levels.

C Private schools and charter schools had significantly higher test scores.

D Test scores are an accurate measure of academic success.

E More students from lower socio-economic backgrounds took the test this time.

Based on the guidelines in this chapter, here’s how to approach this question:

1. Cover the answer choices with your scratch paper.

2. Read the question to discover your mission.

What’s the assumption upon which the argument is based?

3. Read the passage to identify the premise and conclusion (if-then).

If test scores have dropped, then Washington D.C.’s public school system is failing.

4. Answer the question in your own words.

The assumption is necessary in making the argument true, so to make the argument false, you’d have to challenge either the fact that the test scores dropped or that they matter. Because you can’t argue fact, the assumption is that the test scores accurately reflect a school system’s success.

5. Eliminate wrong answers to find the right one.

Choice (A) is wrong because funding is outside the scope of the argument.

Choice (B) is wrong because this statement may strengthen the argument but isn’t an assumption on which the argument is based.

Choice (C) is wrong because the success of other schools has nothing to do with the failure of the school system in question.

Choice (D) is correct because if test scores weren’t an accurate indication of academic success, this argument would be false.

Choice (E) is wrong because this statement may weaken the argument but isn’t an assumption on which the argument is based.

The correct answer is Choice (D).

Trying some other examples

Now that you know the overall approach, try your hand at a few more Argument Analysis questions.

For universal healthcare to become an affordable reality, the federal government first needs to implement cost control measures in the healthcare industry. Tort reform is the obvious place to start. The costs of medical malpractice insurance and lawsuits are skyrocketing, and medical professionals simply increase the cost of their services to keep pace. Tort reform would significantly reduce the number of frivolous malpractice claims, limit the damage awarded to plaintiffs, and reduce the cost of malpractice insurance. Healthcare providers could then pass the savings along to consumers. Until some sort of tort reform effectively addresses this issue, healthcare will continue to be unaffordable regardless of whether people are paying out of pocket or through a government-administered program.

1. Which of the following statements most accurately identifies the assumption that must be true for the argument to be true?

A Universal healthcare will increase the cost of healthcare services.

B Medical insurance costs are rising.

C The costs of medical malpractice lawsuits and insurance represent a significant portion of healthcare costs.

D Universal healthcare will decrease the cost of healthcare services.

E Tort reform would reduce medical malpractice litigation and limit damages awarded to plaintiffs.

The question asks for the assumption on which the argument is based, and the assumption lies between the premise and the conclusion. Rephrase the argument as an if-then statement, and you get something like this: “If we have tort reform, then health services will cost less.” Examine the answer choices to find the one that lies between the premise and conclusion. You can instantly rule out Choice (E), because it merely repeats the definition of tort reform from the passage. Rule out Choices (A) and (D), because nothing in the passage touches on universal healthcare having an effect on the cost of healthcare services. Rule out Choice (B), which may be true but doesn’t touch on the premise. That leaves Choice (C), the assumption that medical malpractice lawsuits and insurance contribute significantly to the cost of health services. If this isn’t true, then tort reform is unlikely to significantly reduce costs for consumers. Correct answer: Choice (C).

While many government reformists seek to curb the influence of corporate lobbying on Capitol Hill, the issue of insider trading continues to fly under the radar. Currently, no law limits members of Congress from trading shares of stock based on what they know about legislative acts that could benefit or harm any given industry or company. Likewise, no law prevents a member of Congress from voting on legislation that would likely affect the share price of a company in which the member is currently invested. As a result, votes may be influenced less by what is right and best for the country and more by the potential effect those votes may have on the performance of a Congress member’s investment portfolio. To encourage Congress to do what’s best for constituents rather than what’s best for their investment portfolios, Congress needs to close the loopholes that exempt members of Congress from the insider trading rules and regulations that everyone else is required to follow.

2. Which of the following statements, if true, most supports the position that Congress needs to close the insider-trading loopholes that provide an unfair advantage to politicians and members of their staff?

Choose all that apply.

A In two months, a top energy-policy adviser nearly doubled his $3,500 investment in a renewable-energy firm after the senator for whom he worked helped pass a 30 percent tax credit for companies in the solar-energy business.

B Three members of Congress introduced the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act, or STOCK Act (H.R. 682), in March 2009, to bar federal employees, including members of Congress and their staff, from cashing in on non-public information they receive in their official capacities.

C A 2004 study revealed that U.S. Senators’ stock trades performed, on average, 12.3 percent better than the market average and 6 percent better than professional investment portfolio manager averages.

Choice (A) provides reasonable support for this claim: An investment having a 100 percent return after two months is rare, and that the investment was in the industry affected by the staffer’s boss is too much of a coincidence. You can rule out Choice (B), because an Act to prohibit an action isn’t proof that the action has occurred. You can also rule out Choice (C), because other reasons for the U.S. Senators’ good performance are possible. It’s possible that senators are savvier investors or can afford the top portfolio managers. Correct answer: Choice (A).