Those who claim that governments

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Conclusion Match17% picked this

   Governments should not be prevented from allocating resources to projects whose intended consequences do not

   I would stop reading after the first five words. This argument isn't about whether governments should / shouldn't be prevented from investing in something. It's about whether they should / shouldn't keep investing in something. The author isn't saying "we shouldn't prevent governments from investing; let them invest if they choose to". He's saying, "we should encourage governments to invest".

   17%
2. B

   Too Strong6% picked this

   One can never underestimate the beneficial consequences of government support of

   Too Strong: "never underestimate the consequences" Bad Conclusion Match First of all, this is pretty expansive. There might be narrow cases of governments supporting ambitious undertakings other than space exploration that the author doesn't like. Secondly, we need a principle that instructs governments to invest in a certain type of investment. This is a principle that tells us how optimistic we should / shouldn't be about the government.

   6%
3. C

   Too Strong0% picked this

   The less practical the goal of a government­ supported project, the more unexpected the consequences

   Too Strong: "the less practical, the more unexpected" Bad Conclusion Match These constant-relationship formulations are really strong. The author hasn't committed herself to this sliding scale of "x units less practical = x units more unexpected consequences". Also, again we're lacking a principle that guides the government in terms of what they should invest in.

   0%
4. D

   Correct70% picked this

   Governments should continue to support those projects that have, in the past,

   Why this is right

   Half premise (space exploration unexpectedly yielded a lot of impactful, beneficial technologies), half conclusion (so we should continue to devote resources to space exploration). The correct answer to over 90% of Principle Justify / Conform questions combines Premise language with Conclusion language.

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

   70%
5. E

   Out of Scope: "ambitious technological undertakings"7% picked this

   In attempting to advance the welfare of society, governments should continue to dedicate resources to

   Do we know that space exploration is an ambitious technological undertaking? Yes, common sense knows that. Did they say it? No, so this is not as tempting as a choice like (D) that uses language that matches up with the explicit premise. This is a very expansive rule that would cover not just space exploration (which has yielded useful technologies) but any other ambitious technological undertaking. The author isn't necessarily giving the government a blank check to spend money on any ambitious technological problem. She is saying "let's keep spending money on space exploration, because it has yielded very widespread, beneficial technologies."

   7%