Some vegetarians have argued that

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: Disprove7% picked this

   It is used to disprove the vegetarian position that we should

   The author is only saying, "In my hypothetical, it would be clear that the vegetarian position is correct". That's far softer than saying, "In my hypothetical, I have disproved their position."

   7%
2. B

   Opposite6% picked this

   It is used to show that the two types of reasons cited in favor of

   It's actually used to show that the two types of reasons would be inextricably interdependent. If eating meat were essential for health considerations, then one of the vegetarians' sufficient reasons for avoiding meat would actually become a reason to eat meat. Meanwhile, their other reason (don't live at the expense of other conscious creatures) would still be saying don't eat meat. Thus, the author is saying, the two reasons would be in conflict with each other. Health considerations would be telling us to eat meat. Anti-murder considerations would be telling us to not eat meat.

   6%
3. C

   Too Strong: Disprove3% picked this

   It is used to disprove the claim that a vegetarian diet

   Nothing in this argument approaches the severity of disproving the vegetarians. The author is only saying, "In my hypothetical, it would be less clear that one of their reasons is valid." You can't disprove the claim that a veggie diet is healthy by saying, "Suppose a non-vegetarian diet were essential to good health". That's like saying I can disprove that Biden won the 2020 election by saying, "Suppose Trump won the election."

   3%
4. D

   Correct80% picked this

   It is used to weaken the claim that the consciousness of animals is a sufficient reason

   Why this is right

   The "suppose" sentence is used to get us to the final sentence. Is the final sentence weakening the claim that consciousness of animals is sufficient reason for not eating meat? Sure! It literally says, "Then (in my hypothetical world), it would be less clear that consciousness of animals is enough of a reason (sufficient reason)." Making a claim seem less clearly true = weakening

   Skill tested: Role · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   80%
5. E

   Too Strong: Show No Reason4% picked this

   It is used to show that there is no sufficient reason for

   The author doesn't think he's proving / showing that the vegetarians are definitely and completely wrong, and thereby proving that there is NO sufficient reason for not eating meat. The author is only considering the two potential sufficient reasons offered by some vegetarians, and she's only trying to say that in a hypothetical world, one of those sufficient reasons wouldn't seem as sufficient.

   4%