Question Type:
Match the Reasoning
Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: We shouldn't recommend that EVERYBODY adopt a fish-protein diet.
Evidence: Even though it's healthier than a red-meat-protein diet, if EVERYBODY went on the fish-protein diet, most of the fish we'd be eating would go extinct, rendering the whole diet impossible.
Answer Anticipation:
This looks like solid reasoning.
Even though recommending X makes sense (it's inherently a positive thing), if EVERYONE did X, then bad stuff would happen that would ultimately make X impossible.
Therefore, we shouldn't try to get EVERYONE to do X.
Correct Answer:
C
Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) The conclusion matches (don't universalize something). But the evidence doesn't have any story like "If everyone did X, it would eventually be impossible to do X."
(B) The conclusion doesn't match: there's no "should", it's not certain, and it's not saying don't universalize something. So there's no reason to read the rest of it.
(C) YES! The conclusion matches. And the evidence tells a similar story, that if everyone mostly saved and invested, a bad thing would happen (recession) that would ultimately make saving and investing impossible for most.
(D) The conclusion doesn't match (not surprising that X is true ≠ we shouldn't tell everyone to do X), so there's no reason to read the rest.
(E) The conclusion doesn't match (not always clear whether something should be X ≠ we shouldn't tell everyone to do X), so there's no reason to read the rest.
Takeaway/Pattern: The "Match the Conclusion" shortcut sometimes does nothing, but on this problem, it quickly obviates the need to read B, D, E. It was EXTRA-easy to find the conclusion quickly because it was the final claim in all five answers, but even when the structure is more varied, there are almost always argument indicator words that help you quickly find the conclusion without reading the whole thing.
#officialexplanation