Critical Reasoning

With my Gday in just a couple of weeks all I can do is keep my fingers crossed so that one of these does not pop up in my verbal section : Can somebody help me on how to attack this ? I have already my best/read a lot of posts/seen video explanations, nothing seems to help in a boldface.

Letter to the editor: Proposition Q, a controversial measure on this year's ballot, would prohibit the ownership of handguns within the city's limits. Under the plan, gun owners would have a 90-day grace period to turn in their weapons to authorities. Proponents of the proposition argue that fewer handguns on the streets would lead to less violent crime, making the city safer for all of its citizens. Unfortunately, the ban would actually have the opposite effect. Since only law abiding citizens would honor the ban, armed criminals would not only keep their weapons but would also have the confidence to act with impunity on a population that could no longer defend itself.

In the letter to the editor, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


The first is an observation that the author uses to support a particular position; the second is that position.

The first is a pattern of cause and effect that the author believes to be true; the second makes a claim that contradicts this pattern.

The first is a position that the author argues will not hold in this case; the second is the author's position.

The first is a prediction that the author believes to be untrue. The second is a claim that undermines the author's position.

The first is a direct relationship that the author believes will not hold in this case; the second makes a claim in support of the author's position.

OA E

Please use the options given for making the letters bold.
You forgot to do the same.

prachich1987 wrote:Please use the options given for making the letters bold.
You forgot to do the same.

helpp

Try to break the passage down into the basics by eliminating non essential items like the 90 day grace period.

1. There is a ban on guns proposed.
2. Position 1: fewer guns lead to less crime and a safer city (proponents- bold 1)
3. Position 2: The ban would lead to more crime and a more dangerous city (author)
4. Criminals would keep their guns and have more confidence because there is no threat of retaliation with a weapon (bold 2)

Clearly the authors position is opposite the position that is boldfaced as statement 1.

Based on that knowledge you can eliminate A & B. The author believes boldface 2 holds true so you can eliminate D quickly, which leaves you with C and E.

In C they state that the 2nd boldface is the authors position. But is it? The answer is no. His position is that its a more dangerous city.

E is the correct answer. The position is that its a more dangerous city. Why is it a more dangerous city? Because the criminals will be the only ones to keep their guns. That is a claim that supports his position.

fitzgerald23 wrote:Try to break the passage down into the basics by eliminating non essential items like the 90 day grace period.

1. There is a ban on guns proposed.
2. Position 1: fewer guns lead to less crime and a safer city (proponents- bold 1)
3. Position 2: The ban would lead to more crime and a more dangerous city (author)
4. Criminals would keep their guns and have more confidence because there is no threat of retaliation with a weapon (bold 2)

Clearly the authors position is opposite the position that is boldfaced as statement 1.

Based on that knowledge you can eliminate A & B. The author believes boldface 2 holds true so you can eliminate D quickly, which leaves you with C and E.

In C they state that the 2nd boldface is the authors position. But is it? The answer is no. His position is that its a more dangerous city.

E is the correct answer. The position is that its a more dangerous city. Why is it a more dangerous city? Because the criminals will be the only ones to keep their guns. That is a claim that supports his position.

thanks for the elaboration on the approach, but I still did not get the difference in author's position and claim to author's position. CAN U REPHRASE plsss ?
sorry for bugging u

I could narrow down the options to C & E
But I think C is a better answer
fitzgerald23, can u plz explain a bit more?

The option E says " the second makes a claim in support of the author’s position"
But I think the author only is saying the 2nd part.
then who is making the claim & supporting the author's position

bblast wrote: thanks for the elaboration on the approach, but I still did not get the difference in author's position and claim to author's position. CAN U REPHRASE plsss ?
sorry for bugging u

Ill try my best. Go back an re-read the following lines in the original passage:

Unfortunately, the ban would actually have the opposite effect. Since only law abiding citizens would honor the ban, armed criminals would not only keep their weapons but would also have the confidence to act with impunity on a population that could no longer defend itself.


The conclusion or position is the first sentence. Remember the passage is about the ban on guns. One group says it makes things safe. His position is that the ban would have the opposite effect. Why would it have the opposite effect? That is what he tells us in the second sentence, which is the boldfaced part for the question.

The author does not disagree with the statement that there would be fewer handguns on the street. His disagreement is that less guns makes the streets more safe. Think of it as a cause and effect statement. There are less guns on the street, thus the city is safer. That is a direct relationship. He says that statement wont hold true. What he claims will hold true is that because less law abiding citizens will have guns to protect themselves armed criminals will be worse than ever. Because of that claim he concludes that the city will not be more safe.

Can U pls Reveal the Source ?

mundasingh123 wrote:Can U pls Reveal the Source ?

mgmat cat