Q11 - Maps are like language

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Determine the Function (how does the statement that "X" function in the argument)

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: The fact that most people are good at not being misled by words shouldn't make us think that most people are also good at not being misled by maps.
Evidence: Most people are TAUGHT to be cautious about language, but there's almost NO education for being sophisticated about maps.

Answer Anticipation:
We basically want to prephrase our ingredient initially as
1. IS the conclusion
2. SUPPORTS the conc
3. OPPOSES the conc
4. Is NEUTRAL to the Conc

Here, they're asking us about part of the final sentence, which was the premise, so we want something to the effect of "this is part of how the author supports her conclusion".

Correct Answer:
C

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) We could say an analogy is made between maps and language in the first sentence. But the final sentence is saying that maps and language are disanalogous, because we're taught about one but not the other.

(B) Eliminate as soon as you see "conclusion".

(C) Sure! It is definitely used to support the argument's conclusion. Can we say that it is "part of a distinction drawn"? For sure. The last sentence draws a distinction between language and maps: one is taught, one is not.

(D) No, this makes it sound like this was a Premise for the first sentence, but the first sentence is not the conclusion.

(E) Not the "conclusion".

Takeaway/Pattern: Not too bad. Finding the conclusion on Determine the Function is similar to doing so on ID the Conclusion: 90% of the time, the Conclusion comes BEFORE the supporting evidence. And very frequently, the conclusion is attached to some but/yet/however pivot.

#officialexplanation

[marshal_of_grey]

Just ... what? I had difficulty identifying any of the elements of this stimulus. I wasn't even sure what the conclusion was.

[csunnerberg13]

Just ... what? I had difficulty identifying any of the elements of this stimulus. I wasn't even sure what the conclusion was.

I'll try to help out - here's how I worked through this problem - I'll try to be very detailed since you said the stimulus was tricky for you to understand.

"Maps are like language: they can be manipulated in order to mislead."
So we're starting off with a comparison between language and maps.

"That most people are generally not mislead by words, however, should not lead us to think that most people are not susceptible to being misled by maps."
Okay, so here a claim is being made: despite this similarity that we already established - there is a small difference between the two, so we can't say that the two are completely alike. People can generally avoid being mislead by language, BUT the same is not true with maps. This also sounds like a conclusion, since it's a claim - but we need to read on to find out...

"Most people are taught to be cautious interpreters of language, but education in the sophisticated use of maps is almost nonexistent."
Okay, so here's the important part - because PART OF this is the thing we want to explain the function of for our answer choice. After reading the last sentence and anticipating that the last sentence was probably a conclusion, this sentence makes a lot of sense as a premise for that conclusion.

So here's the (somewhat simplified) argument of the stimulus:
Most people are taught to be cautious about language, but most people are not educated about maps. --> Just because people generally can avoid being mislead by language does not give us reason to think the same thing about maps.

So with this knowledge, you can jump into the answer choices:
(A) says that it's used as an analogy to clarify the conclusion. Under test taking conditions, I felt it was fair to hold onto this choice for now until I found something better...BUT - the sentence in the stimulus is meant to help clarify A DIFFERENCE between the 2 things we're talking about. Although it begins with a comparison, the argument then hinges on a distinction between the 2 things. So "analogy" is a good hint that A is not correct.

(B) You can get rid of it right from where it says "conclusion." We've already broken this argument down and we know that's not the conclusion. Eliminate and move on.

(C) looks really good - it's saying that it makes the distinction we need for the argument to be true. This is the answer and it makes sense that it is so, once you see how the stimulus functions.

(D) looks good at first where it says "functions as support" - but when you read on, it says it is support for the idea that language and maps ARE similar. That's not what the argument is doing: it hinges on a DISTINCTION not a SIMILARITY.

(E) Get rid of it for saying "conclusion"

I hope this helps!