Science teacher: In any nation

Answer choices

1. A

   Reversed Logic21% picked this

   If scientists communicate with the public, many young people will become excited enough about science to resolve

   This is the chain we know. Succ Flourishing excited Good econ → sci comm → young ppl → comm. sci/pub This answer is trying to go backwards from the 4th thing to the 3rd thing. Not only is that an illegal reversal, but it's not even getting the imagined trigger right. What matters is good communication between scientists and the public, not just "if scientists communicate at all".

   21%
2. B

   Relative vs. Absolute One-Claim Support24% picked this

   The extent to which a national scientific community flourishes depends principally on the number of young people who become excited enough about science

   This is somewhat tempting, because it seems to be connecting the 2nd part to the 3rd part in our chain: Succ Flourishing excited Good econ → sci comm → young ppl → comm. sci/pub But the language of this answer choice is Relative (comparative degrees), whereas the language of the stimulus was Absolute (on/off, yes/no logic). I can say that "For any student, a good personal statement is essential to being accepted to Stanford. For such a personal statement to be good requires that it is generally free of grammar errors." These are true statements in the real world, right? This answer is saying "the extent to which a personal statement is good depends principally on how free of grammar errors it is." That would sound cuckoo in the real world. The fact that avoiding lots of grammar errors is a requirement for a good personal statement doesn't automatically translate into "the quality of a personal statement depends principally on that thing". Similarly, we don't know that the #1 part of having a flourishing scientific community is getting many young people excited. We should also always be wary of any answer choice that seems to only pull support from one claim (this answer seems to only connect to language in the 2nd sentence). The correct answer on Inference questions almost always pulls support from 2 or more claims.

   24%
3. C

   Correct44% picked this

   No nation can have a successful economy unless at some point scientists have communicated well

   Why this is right

   This provides the contrapositive of our chain. If you don't have the 4th thing, then you can't have the 1st thing, because the 1st thing requires the 4th thing. Succ Flourishing excited Good econ → sci comm → young ppl → comm. sci/pub If scientists have never communicated well with the public, then we won't have sparked the excitement of many young people to become pro scientists. Without that excitement, we won't have a flourishing national scientific community. And without that flourishing community, we can't have a successful economy.

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

   44%
4. D

   Too Strong: Most6% picked this

   It is essential to any nation's economy that most of the young people in that nation who are excited

   This is somewhat tempting because it seems to be saying that the 1st thing requires the 3rd thing. Succ Flourishing excited Good econ → sci comm → young ppl → comm. sci/pub But the 3rd thing is that "many young people are excited enough to resolve to be pro scientists". This is saying that we need most young people to be excited. That's a much higher bar. It's a true fact to say many Americans were hit by lightning last year, but nowhere near true to say that most Americans were hit by lightning last year.

   6%
5. E

   Too Strong: any scientific endeavor5% picked this

   An essential component of success in any scientific endeavor is good communication between the scientists involved in that

   We only defined necessary preconditions for a successful economy. We have no idea what's required for any successful scientific endeavor. We know what's required for a flourishing national scientific community, and we know what's required for many young people to be excited about future science careers. But neither of those are defining something essential for every single scientific endeavor.

   5%