Apple, the company that has the highest revenue per employee, focuses more on simple and

functional design than its competitors.

Meaning Analysis

Apple,
o

the company that has the highest revenue per employee,

focuses more on simple and functional design than its competitors.

The sentence presents a comparison. However, the way this sentence is written, one can infer
two comparisons:
First Comparison: Apple focuses more on simple and functional design than on its competitors.
Entities Compared simple and functional design and competitors.
Second Comparison: Apple focuses more on simple and functional design than its competitors
focus on. Entities Compared Apple and its competitors.
The correct sentence should clearly state one unambiguous meaning.

Error Analysis
If the sentence is intended to compare simple and functional design and competitors (stating that
Apple focuses on design more than it focuses on its competitors), then we need the pronoun on
before its competitors to make the comparison clear.
If the sentence is intended to compare Apple and its competitors (stating that Apple focuses on
design more than its competitors do), then we need the helping verb do before its competitors
to make the comparison clear.

Answer Choices
more on simple and functional design than
Incorrect: This choice has the error pointed out in the error analysis.

B
on more simple yet functional design than
Incorrect:

1)

This choice repeats the same ambiguous comparison error as in choice A.

2) Change of placement of more changes the meaning. As per the original

sentence, more modifies focuses. Apple focuses more on design than its
competitors. As per this choice, more modifies simple. Here the emphasis is not
on the action of focusing but on the design itself.
3) Use of yet changes the meaning. As per the original choice, and suggests that
the design is simple and functional. Use of the word yet brings in a contrast,
implying that even though the design is simple, it is functional. The original sentence
does not present this contrast.

more on simple and functional design than on

Correct:
Use of the preposition on makes the comparison clear. The sentence states that
Apple focuses on design more than it focuses on its competitors.

D
on simple and functional design than
Incorrect:
1) Use of than requires the use of some comparative terms such as more to
present the comparison. Without the word more, the comparison is incomplete.
2)

This choice repeats the same ambiguous comparison error as in choice A.

E
more on simple design and is more functional than are
Incorrect:
1) This choice distorts the intended meaning. As per this choice, the subject for is
is Apple. The choice states that Apple is more functional whereas, per the original
choice, the design is functional.
2) Also, the choice suggests a comparison between Apple and the competitors on
the basis that Apple is more functional. This is certainly not the intended meaning of
the sentence.

As it is almost categorically accepted, the most intelligent scientists are those who
interpret empirical data to draw independent conclusions rather than just bolstering
already credited scientific hypotheses.

Meaning Analysis

As it is almost categorically accepted,

the most intelligent scientists are those

o

who interpret empirical data

to draw independent conclusions

rather than just bolstering already credited scientific hypotheses.

The sentence says something is almost a norm. What is that something? The something
is that as per the accepted belief the most intelligent scientists are those who use factual
data to make independent conclusions rather than to strengthen already credited scientific
hypotheses.

Error Analysis
The sentence uses the idiom X rather than Y where X and Y should be grammatically as
well as logically parallel. Here, X = to draw and Y = bolstering. These two entities are
not grammatically parallel to each other. This is the only error in this sentence.

Answer Choices

A
As it is almost categorically accepted, the most intelligent scientists are those
who interpret empirical data to draw independent conclusions rather than just
bolstering already credited scientific hypotheses.
Incorrect: This choice has the error stated in the error analysis.

B
Rather than just bolstering already credited scientific hypotheses, the most
intelligent scientists are the ones who interpret empirical data to draw
independent conclusions, which is almost categorically accepted.
Incorrect:
1)

This choice distorts the parallel list.

1. Per the intended meaning, the differentiation between the two segments
of scientists comes from the intended use of their interpretation of
empirical data
1. Most Intelligent Scientists - to draw independent conclusions or
2. Other Scientists - to bolster already created hypothesis.
2. Per this choice, the differentiation between the two segments comes
from what they do
1. Most Intelligent Scientists - interpret empirical data to draw
independent conclusion
2. Other Scientists - bolster already created hypothesis. Note this
choice does not indicate that segment 2 interprets empirical data.

2) Per the intended meaning the relative pronoun modifier which should
modify the preceding clause. But its placement is such that it modifies the
preceding noun - independent conclusions and hence distorts the meaning of
the sentence. Note that this modifier cannot be used to modify a clause.

Almost categorically accepted, the fact that the scientists who are the most
intelligent dont just interpret empirical data to draw independent conclusions,
but can also bolster already credited scientific hypotheses.
Incorrect:

1)

There is no verb for the subject the fact.

2) Use of can also is incorrect as it distorts the intended meaning of the

sentence. As per the original sentence, the most intelligent scientists are those
who interpret data to draw conclusions rather than to bolster already credited
hypotheses. As per this choice, the most intelligent scientists are those who
interpret data to do both.

D
The most intelligent scientists are the ones who interpret empirical data, which
is almost categorically accepted, rather than just bolster already credited
scientific hypotheses.
Incorrect:
This relative pronoun modifier which incorrectly refers to empirical data.
According to the intended meaning, it is not empirical data that is categorically
accepted but the fact that certain scientists are considered the most intelligent.

It is almost categorically accepted that the most intelligent scientists are those
who interpret empirical data to draw independent conclusions rather than just
bolster already credited scientific hypotheses.
Correct:
This is the correct answer choice as it rectifies the only error of Choice A.
Please note that to is understood before bolster as to is already present
before the first entity in the list draw. Hence, it is not necessary to repeat it
before bolster.
A little-known fact from Michelangelos early years as an artist is that he forged a statue in
1496, treating it with acid to make it look like an antique, and sold it for far more than it
was actually worth.

Meaning Analysis

A little-known fact from Michelangelos early years as an artist is

that he

forged a statue in 1496,

treating it with acid to make it look like an antique,

and sold it for far more

than it was actually worth.

The sentence presents some historical facts about Michelangelo. The sentence begins by
stating a fact about Michelangelos early years as an artist. Michelangelo forged a statue
in 1496. The sentence then provides additional information about how he forged it: he
treated it with acid to make it look like an antique. He sold this statue for far more than its
actual value.

Error Analysis
The pronoun he logically refers to the noun Michelangelo. This is a grammatical error
since this noun is not present in the sentence, which uses the possessive form
Michelangelos.

Answer Choices
he forged a statue in 1496, treating it with acid to make it look like an antique
Incorrect: This choice has the error pointed out in the error analysis.

B
his 1496 statue was a forgery, which was treated with acid to make it look like
an antique
Incorrect:
1) The passive verb was treated does not convey the meaning that
Michelangelo himself treated the statue with acid.
2) The verbs was and sold are not logically parallel, leading to a
nonsensical meaning. The sentence now states that his 1496 statue was a
forgery and sold it. The statue clearly did not perform the action of selling
itself.

C
he forged a statue in 1496 that was treated with acid, making it look like an
antique
Incorrect:
1) This choice has the same pronoun error as option A does.
2) Like Choice B, this choice also uses the passive verb was treated,
leading to a meaning error.

Michelangelo forged a statue in 1496, treating it with acid to make it look like
an antique
Correct: This choice is the correct answer as it fixes the pronoun error of option
A by using the noun Michelangelo.

E
a statue treated with acid to make it look like an antique was forged in 1496
Incorrect:
1) This option does not make it clear that Michelangelo himself forged the
statue.
2) It also repeats the parallelism error of Choice B since the verbs was and
sold are not logically parallel to each other.
The original Ancient Greek gymnasiums were incredibly advanced and had more in
common with our modern universities than with our local fitness clubs, holding lectures
and discussions on philosophy, literature, and music, and offering free public libraries,
long before teachers such as Plato and Aristotle had begun their work.

Meaning Analysis

The original Ancient Greek gymnasiums

o

were incredibly advanced and

had more in common with our modern universities than with our local
fitness clubs,

holding lectures and discussions on philosophy, literature, and

music, and

offering free public libraries,

long before teachers such as Plato or Aristotle had begun

their work.

This sentence talks about the original Ancient Greek gymnasiums. It says that these
gymnasiums were very advanced and that they had more in common with our modern
universities than with our local fitness clubs.
The sentence then goes on to describe how these gymnasiums were similar to modern
universities:

1. They held lectures and discussions on philosophy, literature, and music.

2. They offered public libraries for free.
All this happened before teachers such as Plato or Aristotle started their work.

Error Analysis
The use of the past perfect tense had begun is incorrect since it has been used for a
later event. The advanced Ancient Greek gymnasiums existed before Plato and others
began their work.

Answer Choices
A
had more in common with our modern universities than with our local fitness
clubs, holding lectures and discussions on philosophy, literature, and music,
and offering free public libraries, long before teachers such as Plato and
Aristotle had begun their work
Incorrect:
This choice has the error pointed out in the error analysis.

held lectures, discussed philosophy, literature, and music, and offered free
public libraries long before teachers such as Plato and Aristotle began their
work, having more in common with our modern universities than our local
fitness clubs
Incorrect:
The comma + verb-ing modifier having incorrectly refers to the preceding
clause teachers began their work. The teachers did not have anything in
common with modern universities; the Ancient Greek gymnasiums did.

had more in common with our modern universities than with our local fitness
clubs, holding lectures and discussions on philosophy, literature, and music,
and offering libraries free to the public, long before teachers such as Plato and
Aristotle began their work
Correct:
This choice corrects the only error from the original sentence by changing the
past perfect tense into the simple past tense.

D
have more in common with our modern universities than our local fitness
clubs; they held lectures and discussions on philosophy, literature, and music,
and offered libraries free to the public, long before teachers such as Plato and
Aristotle had begun their work
Incorrect:
1) The simple present tense have is incorrectly used to present a fact from
the past.
2) Removing with before our local fitness clubs, this choice presents an
ambiguous comparison. The two possible comparisons here are:
1. The gymnasiums had more in common with the modern universities
than they had with local fitness clubs
2. Or the gymnasiums had more in common with the modern universities
than the local fitness clubs had in common with the modern
universities.
3) This choice has the same verb tense error as in choice A.

were more like our modern universities than our local fitness clubs, holding
lectures and discussions on philosophy, literature, and music as well as offering
free public libraries, long before teachers such as Plato or Aristotle had begun
their work
Incorrect:
1) This choice has the same comparison error as in choice D.
2)

It also has the same verb tense error as in choice A.

In the financial year 2010-11, the increase in demand due to the relatively stable economy
after the recession increased Indias service exports to $133 billion, nearly 38 percent
more than that of 2009-10.

Meaning Analysis

In the financial year 2010-11, the increase in demand due to the relatively stable
economy after the recession increased Indias service exports to $133 billion,
o

nearly 38 percent more than that of 2009-10.

This sentence tells us that in 2010-2011, Indias service exports rose to $133 billion. This
increase was because of the relatively stable economy after the recession. These exports
were nearly 38 percent more than the exports of 2009-2010.

Error Analysis
Singular pronoun that refers to the plural noun exports, resulting in pronounantecedent number agreement error.

Answer Choices
that of 2009-10
Incorrect:
This choice has the error pointed out in the error analysis.

those of 2009-10
Correct:
This choice rectifies the only error of the original sentence by using the plural
pronoun those to refer to the plural noun exports.

C
it did in its 2009-10 exports
Incorrect:
The construction of this choice is such that it appears that the pronoun it
refers to India and the pronoun its refers to Indias. First of all it cannot
grammatically refer to India since India does not exist in the sentence. Note
that the sentence has Indias and not India.
Secondly, this reference is absolutely illogical. It appears to indicate that India
did the increase in its exports. This is not correct since the increase happened
because of the factors stated. It was not as if India as a country undertook some
measures to make this increase happen.

D
those of its 2009-10 service exports
Incorrect:
Since this choice already uses the noun service exports the pronoun those
becomes redundant.

E
it exported in 2009-10
Incorrect:
As in choice C, the pronoun it appears to refer to India, but this antecedent
does not exist in the sentence.
A film is more likely to have a complex storyline when it is directed by a director who has
won an Academy Award. Regardless of the awards won by the director, a film with a
complex storyline is more likely to do badly at the box-office than a film with a story-line
that is not complex. Since other causes of poor box-office performance are not related to
the awards won by the director, there must be more films with poor box-office collections

with Academy Award-winning directors than with directors who have not won any
Academy Awards.
The argument above is most vulnerable to which one of the following criticisms?

Argument Analysis

Pre-Thinking
Conclusion Clarification
The author concludes that total number of films with poor BO collections directed by
AWDs would be greater than total number of films with poor BO collections directed by
NAWDs. The conclusion is based on the fact that AWDs are more likely to direct a film
with CS, and irrespective of the awards won by the director, films with CS are more likely
to perform worse at box office than films without CS. All other factors behind poor
performance of films at box office are unrelated to awards won by the directors.
Pre-Thinking Approach
To pre-think a flaw in the reasoning, lets see how we can falsify this conclusion. To do
so, we will look at the logical structure, focusing on linkage 1 and the conclusion. We will
understand the condition under which the conclusion is falsified. Thus, the flaw would
show a logical gap in the authors reasoning while reaching the conclusion.
Linkage#1

Falsification Condition: What if the total number of films directed by NAWDs is

significantly more than that directed by AWDs? In such a case, there may not be
more films with poor BO collections with AWDs than with NAWDs.

Flaw: The argument is vulnerable to the criticisms that there is an abrupt jump
from the premises given to the conclusion drawn. The argument has arrived at
the conclusion without comparing the actual total number of films made by
Academy Award winning directors and the ones made by the rest of the
directors.

To understand the same, please consider the following scenario:

Category

Total films directed

(A)

Total films with

Complex story-line

Academy Award winning

directors

100

80% = 80

Other directors

1000

20% = 200

Likelihood that a film

complex story-line w
perform poorly at bo
(B)
80%

With this pre-thinking in mind, lets evaluate the answer choices.

Answer Choices
A
It ignores the fact that a film that does not do well on the box-office may
eventually do well when broadcasted on TV.
Incorrect - No flaw
This statement is of no relevance to the argument since the argument is
concerned with the performance of the films only at the box office.

It fails to consider a scenario in which the number of films directed by directors

who have not won Academy Awards is significantly more than that directed by
directors who have won Academy Awards.
Correct
This choice is written along the lines of our pre-thinking per Linkage #1. It
points out that the argument does not compare the actual total number of films
made by AWDs and NAWDs. If we see the pre-thinking example, we can
notice that the authors conclusion is incorrect for the particular scenario.

It identifies one aspect of the films as the sole determinant of their box office

performance without considering other possible aspects.

Incorrect - No flaw
This statement is incorrect since the passage does talk about other
factors besides a complex storyline that determine a films performance at the
box office. The passage says that all other factors are not related to awards won
by directors.

D
It fails to consider a scenario in which directors may be aware of the fact that a
complex storyline may not translate into a successful box-office collection.
Incorrect - No flaw
The awareness of directors regarding the eventual box-office performance of
their films is of no relevance to the authors conclusion.

E
It fails to factor in the number of films with poor box-office collections that
were directed by Academy Award-winning directors and that ultimately won
critical acclaim.
Incorrect - No flaw
This statement is irrelevant since the authors conclusion is concerned with
only the box-office performance of such films.
The South-African anti-apartheid revolutionary, Nelson Mandela, also known as Madiba
or Tata (Father), faced several charges during his fight against the government, spending
27 years in prison, was elected the President of South Africa in 1994, only four years after
he had come out of prison.

Meaning Analysis

The South-African anti-apartheid revolutionary Nelson Mandela,

o

also known as Madiba or Tata (Father),

faced several charges during his fight against the government,

spending 27 years in prison,

was elected the President of South Africa in 1994, only four years
after

he had come out of prison.

This sentence presents a few facts about the South-African anti-apartheid revolutionary
Nelson Mandela, who was also known as Madiba or Tata. Mandela:
1. faced many charges when he was fighting against the government.
1. This led to him spending 27 years in jail.
2. became the president of South Africa in 1994, four years after his release
from the prison.

Error Analysis
The verbs in the parallel list faced and elected are grammatically parallel. However,
they should be connected using a parallelism marker, which is missing from the sentence.
Note that use of past perfect tense is correct in the clause he had come out because
Mandela first came out of the prison and then became the president. However, use of
had come out is OPTIONAL here and even simple past tense verb came out will also
be correct here because after explicitly establishes the time sequencing.

Answer Choices
A
faced several charges during his fight against the government, spending 27
years in prison, was elected the President of South Africa in 1994, only four
years after he had come
Incorrect: This choice has the error pointed out in the error analysis.

faced several charges during his fight against the government, spending 27
years in prison, and was elected the President of South Africa in 1994, only
four years after coming
Correct: This choice corrects the only error of Choice A by adding and
before was elected.

who faced several charges during his fight against the government, having
spent 27 years in prison, and was elected the President of South Africa in 1994,
only four years after he had come
Incorrect:
1) There is no verb for the subject Nelson Mandela since who is the
subject of the verbs faced and was elected in this choice.
2) This choice distorts the intended meaning since having spent illogically
implies that he faced several charges after spending 27 years in prison. This is
exactly opposite to the intended meaning.

faced several charges during his fight against the government while spending
27 years in prison and was elected the President of South Africa in 1994, only
four years after he came
Incorrect: This choice also changes the intended meaning. This choice nonsensically implies that he faced several charges while he spent 27 years in
prison.

E
who faced several charges during his fight against the government and spent 27
years in prison, being elected the President of South Africa in 1994, only four
years after he came
Incorrect:
1)

This choice retains the missing verb error of Choice C.

2) This choice distorts the parallel list. Now instead of faced and elected
being part of the list, faced and spent have been made parallel. Also,
elected has been made a verb-ing modifier, leading to distortion of meaning.
Many stage actors follow a form of method-acting in which the emphasis is on
understanding the psychology of the characters being played and keeping in mind how
the characters would have reacted in various situations being enacted. In their prerehearsal stage, they go to extremes such as living in situations similar to their
hypothetical characters. Therefore, it is highly likely that such actors are very consistent in
their initial performance in rehearsals and their final on-stage performance.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the above argument?

Argument Analysis

Pre-Thinking
Conclusion Clarification
N/A
Pre-Thinking Approach
Lets see how we can make the conclusion more believable. To do so, we will look at the
logical structure, focusing on linkage 1, and try to come up with assumptions. The
strengthener could be based around these assumptions. Accordingly, the first step in the
process is to think of a falsifying situation in which the conclusion doesnt hold. The
assumption then will be that this condition does not exist.
Linkage #1:
Falsifying condition: Any reason that shows that there can be a significant inconsistency
between the initial rehearsal performance and final on-stage performance of actors
following method acting.
o

Instance: As rehearsals progress, some factor influences the

performances, leading to a significant difference between the initial and
final performance.

Assumption: No factor influences a significant change in

performance between the first rehearsal and final on-stage
performances.

Strengthener: The actors do not get significantly better in their

performances as they progress in their rehearsals.

With this understanding in mind, let's take a look at the option statements.

Answer Choices
For an actor, the repetition of a performance in rehearsals adds little to the
understanding of the character being played.

Correct
This choice is on the same lines as our pre-thinking analysis. It states that the
actors understanding of the characters does not change with repeat rehearsals
and hence furthers our belief in the conclusion.

B
There are some props that are available to actors only on the final day of the
show.
Incorrect - Irrelevant
We do not know how these props affect the performance of the actor.

C
Many famous and highly paid actors are from acting schools that specialize in
teaching method-acting.
Incorrect - Irrelevant
The actors in method acting are not important. The difference in the
performance is the focus of the discussion.

It is very likely for a method-actor playing the role of a beggar to actually dress
up and wear torn and soiled clothes throughout the preparation stage to
understand the psychology of the character.
Incorrect - Irrelevant
How the actors get in to character is not the main focus of the argument. The
consistency in performance is the main question here.

E
These days many film actors prefer to do multiple rehearsals with their coactors to fully understand the character they are portraying.
Incorrect - Irrelevant
This statement does not talk about method acting or stage actors.

The inmates of Arizona state prison who are selected by the state forest department to
work as wilderness firefighters eat in the same cafeterias, sleep in the same campsites,
and wear the same uniforms as their professional counterparts do, defying the rigid
relationship barriers enforced inside prison walls.
View Solution

Answer Choices
A
defying the rigid relationship barriers enforced

defying the relationship barriers enforced rigidly

C
they defy the rigid relationship barriers enforced

D
an arrangement to defy the relationship barriers that are enforced rigidly

an arrangement that defies the rigid relationship barriers enforced

Ships during the Baroque period usually had four masts as well as gigantic figureheads, usually
representing angels or other divine beings that were believed to protect the ship, that could only
be installed in place once the ships stemhead was fixed in place. The recently-discovered wreck
of the Endeavor, a Royal Navy warship from the Baroque age known to have been destroyed in
a battle, has a stemhead but not a figurehead. Clearly, the figurehead must have been either
destroyed or detached from the ship during the battle it was part of.
Which of the following would most help to assess the conclusion above?

Argument Analysis

Pre-Thinking
Conclusion Clarification
The conclusion states that the FH on Endeavor must have been either destroyed or detached
from the ship during the battle.
Pre-Thinking Approach

In order to evaluate the linkage, well pre think assumptions by thinking of conditions that will
falsify the conclusion. The assumptions then will be that these conditions dont exist. To do so,
lets look at linkage 1 and understand the conditions under which it doesnt hold.
Linkage#1

Falsification Condition: What if, not all ships from the Baroque period that had an SH had
an FH too? What if SH could also be fixed for purposes other than installing an FH? In
other words, what if an FH wasnt installed in the ship? In such a case, its possible that
the Endeavour didnt have an FH and thus it couldnt have been destroyed or detached.
Thus, the linkage will not hold.

Assumptions1: All sailing ships from the Baroque period that had an SH also had an FH
installed in that place.

Assumption2: For an SH, no other possible purpose existed such that it could require
fitting the SH on the ship even without an FH.

An answer choice that evaluates any of the fundamental assumptions made by the author will be
the correct choice. With this pre-thinking in mind, lets evaluate the answer choices.

Answer Choices
A
Whether the figurehead on Endevaor was similar to that found on other ship-wrecks
from the Baroque period
Incorrect - Irrelevant
The similarity of the figurehead has nothing to do with determining whether it existed
on the ship in the first place or not.

Whether a stemhead could have been installed for purposes unrelated to holding a
figurehead
Correct
This choice is written along the lines of our pre-thinking per Linkage assumption 2. If
the stemhead could have been installed for other reason, reasons not related to holding
a figurehead, then it is quite possible that even though the ship had a stemhead but not
a figurehead. However, if the answer to the question is no, then it increases our faith in
the author's conclusion.

Whether the historians unanimously agree that the Royal Navy actually participated in
the battle in which it was known to have been destroyed in
Incorrect - Already stated
The passage already tells us that the Royal Navy was a part of the battle.

D
Whether ships from periods other than the Baroque also had stemheads to support
figureheads
Incorrect - Irrelevant
Evaluating whether ships from other periods also had SHs to support FHs doesn't tell
us whether Endeavour had an FH to begin with.

Whether most military ships of the Baroque period were mounted with figureheads
Incorrect - No new Information
We are already told in the passage that the ships usually had figureheads. Hence, this
choice does not add anything to our understanding of the argument.
The authors primarily concerned with

Passage Analysis
Paragraph
Logical arguments are usually classified
as either deductive or inductive,
depending on the process used to arrive
at them.
In the process of deduction, you begin
with some statements, called premises,
which are assumed to be true, and you
then determine what else would have to
be true if the premises are true.

Reading and Thinking

(in mind)
Two normal ways of
classifying logical
arguments:
1. deductive
2. inductive
How deductive arguments
are arrived at:
1. start with premises
2. premises = true
3. if premises true, what
else could be true

My Paragraph Summary
(written)
Explains one of the two
usual processes for
arriving at a logical
argument

For example, in mathematics you can

begin with some axioms and then
determine what you can prove to be true
given those axioms are true.

Eg. of the above

The argument you arrive at

With deduction you can provide absolute by deduction, you can be
proof of your conclusions, since your
100% sure of it, as your
premises are considered correct.
premises are regarded
correct.
The premises themselves, however,
remain unproven and unprovable; they
must be accepted on face value, or by
faith, or for the purpose of exploration.

BUT the premises are

beyond the reach of being
tested.
Process of arriving at
inductive arguments:

On the other hand, in the process of

induction, you begin with some data, and
then determine what general
conclusion(s) can logically be derived
from that data.

Elaborates on the
process of arriving at
the second kind of
1. begin with some data argument
2. analyse it and see
what kind of
conclusions can be
drawn from it

The conclusions you are

In other words, you determine what
drawing are with respect to
theory or theories could explain the data.
what explains the data.
Eg. of the above:
For example, you note that the
Data suggest that chances of
probability of becoming schizophrenic is becoming schizophrenic
greatly increased if at least one parent is greatly enhanced if one
schizophrenic, and from that you
parent is schizophrenic.
conclude that schizophrenia may be
Your conclusion:
inherited.
Schizophrenia may be
hereditary.
That is certainly a reasonable hypothesis
given the data.

As per the process of

induction, the conclusion is
reasonable.

Note, however, that induction does not

prove that the theory is correct.

BUT this process does not

prove the theory you arrived
at.

There are often alternative theories that

are also supported by the data.

Data could easily lead to

other theories.

For example, the behavior of the

Same data used to arrive at a
schizophrenic parent may cause the child different theory.
to be schizophrenic, not the genes.

The important part of this

What is important in induction is that the
process is that the conclusion
theory does indeed offer a logical
arrived at does offer a logical
explanation of the data.
explanation of the data.
To conclude that the parents have no
effect on the schizophrenia of the
children is not supportable given the
data, and would not be a logical
conclusion.

If from the same data one

concludes that there is no
relation between the
schizophrenia observed
between the two generations
is not a logical conclusion
through this process.

Both deduction and induction by

Neither of the two processes
themselves are inadequate for a scientific is sufficient on its own for a
approach.
scientific approach.
While deduction gives absolute proof, it
never makes contact with the real world;
there is no place for observation or
experimentation - no way to test the
validity of the premises.
And, while induction is driven by
observation, it never approaches actual
proof of a theory.
Accordingly, a synthesis of these two
logical approaches is required for an
actual scientific method.

+ve of deduction = gives

100% proof
-ve of deduction = no way to
test the basis in the first place Evaluates both the
processes in terms of
how scientific they are
+ve of induction = through
observation of real data
-ve of induction = no
conclusive theory
A combination of the two is
required for a scientific
approach

Summary and Main Point

Prethinking
This is a Main Idea question. The correct choice must be broad enough to encompass the
various sections of the passage but specific enough to not veer outside the scope of the
passage. Also, before going in to the answer choices, you must come to an approximate
idea of what the author wants to convey through the passage. In fact, as soon as you
finish reading the passage, you should have a fair idea of the primary purpose/main idea
of the passage. Accordingly, lets take a look at the overall structure of the passage.
As seen in the summary and main point section above, the author explains the two
processes in the first two paragraphs and then goes on to evaluate them in the last
paragraph. This evaluation is done with respect to how scientific these processes are. So
we can conclude that the main purpose of the author is to explain the two normal
processes of arriving at a logical argument and evaluate them on a specific criterion.
With this understanding in mind, lets evaluate the answer choices.

Answer Choices
describing two modes of constructing a logical argument
Incorrect: Partial Scope
This choice barely captures the scope of the first two paragraphs and fails to
account for the final one. In addition to describing the two processes, the author