Nokea
Which choice correctly matches these samples with incompletely met criteria?
- A. Sample 1's evidence is not sufficient; sample 2's evidence is not relevant; sample 3's evidence is not factual.
- B. Sample 1's evidence is not factual; sample 2's evidence is not sufficient; sample 3's evidence is not relevant.
- C. Sample 1's evidence is not relevant; sample 2's evidence is not factual; sample 3's evidence is not sufficient.
- D. The evidence of samples 1 and 3 is insufficient; sample 2's evidence is factual but irrelevant.
Correct Answer: C
Rationale: Choice C correctly matches the samples with incompletely met criteria. It states that sample 1's evidence is not relevant, sample 2's evidence is not factual, and sample 3's evidence is not sufficient. This aligns with the criteria mentioned, indicating a lack of relevance, factual accuracy, and sufficiency in each sample, respectively. Choices A, B, and D do not accurately match the samples with the given criteria, making them incorrect. In choice A, while sample 1's evidence is not sufficient, sample 2's evidence is not relevant, and sample 3's evidence is not factual, the order in which these aspects are mentioned is not aligned with the criteria provided. Choice B has the correct order but mismatches the criteria with the samples. Choice D incorrectly assesses the evidence of the samples, focusing on sufficiency and relevance but not aligning with the specified criteria for each sample.
You may also like to solve these questions
Most scientists agree that while the scientific method is an invaluable methodological tool, it is not a failsafe method for arriving at objective truth. It is debatable, for example, whether a hypothesis can actually be confirmed by evidence.
When a hypothesis is of the form “All x are y,†it is commonly believed that a piece of evidence that is both x and y confirms the hypothesis. For example, for the hypothesis “All monkeys are hairy,†a particular monkey that is hairy is thought to be a confirming piece of evidence for the hypothesis. A problem arises when one encounters evidence that disproves a hypothesis: while no scientist would argue that one piece of evidence proves a hypothesis, it is possible for one piece of evidence to disprove a hypothesis. To return to the monkey example, one hairless monkey out of one billion hairy monkeys disproves the hypothesis “All monkeys are hairy.†Single pieces of evidence, then, seem to affect a given hypothesis in radically different ways. For this reason, the confirmation of hypotheses is better described as probabilistic.
Hypotheses that can only be proven or disproven based on evidence need to be based on probability because sample sets for such hypotheses are too large. In the monkey example, every single monkey in the history of monkeys would need to be examined before the hypothesis could be proven or disproven. By making confirmation a function of probability, one may make provisional or working conclusions that allow for the possibility of a given hypothesis being disconfirmed in the future. In the monkey case, then, encountering a hairy monkey would slightly raise the probability that “all monkeys are hairy,†while encountering a hairless monkey would slightly decrease the probability that “all monkeys are hairy.†This method of confirming hypotheses is both counterintuitive and controversial, but it allows for evidence to equitably affect hypotheses and it does not require infinite sample sets for confirmation or disconfirmation.
According to the passage, what effect does encountering an automobile with eighteen wheels have on the hypothesis 'All automobiles have only four wheels'?
- A. It proves the hypothesis.
- B. It raises the hypothesis's probability.
- C. It disproves the hypothesis.
- D. It decreases the hypothesis's probability.
Correct Answer: C
Rationale: Encountering an automobile with eighteen wheels contradicts the hypothesis that all automobiles have only four wheels. This contradicts the initial hypothesis, proving it to be false. The passage explains that when evidence disproves a hypothesis, it directly contradicts the hypothesis, leading to its disproof. In the context of the monkey example provided, encountering a hairless monkey out of many hairy monkeys disproved the hypothesis 'All monkeys are hairy.' Therefore, the presence of an automobile with eighteen wheels disproves the hypothesis that all automobiles have only four wheels. Other choices are incorrect because encountering such an automobile directly contradicts the initial hypothesis, leading to its disproof, rather than proving it, raising its probability, or decreasing its probability.
The following is an excerpt of an article published by The New York Times announcing the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Use the following article to answer the next five questions.
AWFUL EVENT
President Lincoln Shot by an Assassin
The Deed Done at Ford's Theatre Last Night
THE ACT OF A DESPERATE REBEL
The President Still Alive at Last Accounts No Hopes Entertained of His Recovery
Attempted Assassination of Secretary Seward
DETAILS OF THE DREADFUL TRAGEDY.
Official
War Department, Washington April 15, 1:30 A.M. - Maj. Gen. Dis.: This evening at about 9:30 P.M. at Ford's Theatre, the President, while sitting in his private box with Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Harris, and Major Rathburn, was shot by an assassin, who suddenly entered the box and appeared behind the President. The assassin then leaped upon the stage, brandishing a large dagger or knife, and made his escape in the rear of the theatre. The pistol ball entered the back of the President's head and penetrated nearly through the head. The wound is mortal. The President has been insensible ever since it was inflicted, and is now dying.
About the same hour an assassin, whether the same or not, entered Mr. Sewards' apartments, and under the pretense of having a prescription, was shown to the Secretary's sick chamber. The assassin immediately rushed to the bed, and inflicted two or three stabs on the throat and two on the face. It is hoped the wounds may not be mortal. My apprehension is that they will prove fatal.
The nurse alarmed Mr. Frederick Seward, who was in an adjoining room, and hastened to the door of his father's room, when he met the assassin, who inflicted upon him one or more dangerous wounds. The recovery of Frederick Seward is doubtful.
It is not probable that the President will live throughout the night.
Gen. Grant and wife were advertised to be at the theatre this evening, but he started to Burlington at 6 o'clock this evening. At a Cabinet meeting at which Gen. Grant was present, the subject of the state of the country and the prospect of a speedy peace was discussed. The President was very cheerful and hopeful, and spoke very kindly of Gen. Lee and others of the Confederacy, and of the establishment of government in Virginia.
All the members of the Cabinet except Mr. Seward are now in attendance upon the President. I have seen Mr. Seward, but he and Frederick were both unconscious.
Edwin M. Stanton, Secretary of War.
In the context of the article, the word mortal means
- A. deadly.
- B. recoverable.
- C. fatal.
- D. dangerous.
Correct Answer: C
Rationale: In the context of the article describing the assassination of President Lincoln, the word 'mortal' is used to describe a wound that will cause death. The sentence 'The wound is mortal' indicates that the wound is fatal and will result in the President's death. Therefore, the correct synonym for 'mortal' in this context is 'fatal,' meaning causing death. Choice A, 'deadly,' is the best synonym as it directly relates to causing death. Choices B and D, 'recoverable' and 'dangerous,' do not accurately reflect the meaning of 'mortal' in this context.
Among the following structural patterns in a paragraph, which does a writer use to show readers something instead of telling them something?
- A. Division
- B. Narration
- C. Definition
- D. Description
Correct Answer: D
Rationale: The writer uses description as a structural pattern to show readers something instead of telling them. By vividly describing Thomas Jefferson, his life, achievements, and significance, the reader can form a mental image and understanding of who he was without being explicitly told. Description allows for a more engaging and immersive experience for the reader compared to being told facts directly.
Choice A, 'Division,' involves breaking down a subject into parts for analysis and understanding, not necessarily showing something instead of telling it.
Choice B, 'Narration,' is the act of telling a story or recounting events, which involves direct communication rather than showing through vivid details.
Choice C, 'Definition,' is providing the meaning of something, which is informative but does not create a visual or immersive experience like description does.
The federal government regulates dietary supplements through the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The regulations for dietary supplements are not the same as those for prescription or over-the-counter drugs. In general, the regulations for dietary supplements are less strict.
To begin with, a manufacturer does not have to prove the safety and effectiveness of a dietary supplement before it is marketed. A manufacturer is permitted to say that a dietary supplement addresses a nutrient deficiency, supports health, or is linked to a particular body function (such as immunity), if there is research to support the claim. Such a claim must be followed by the words “This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.â€
Also, manufacturers are expected to follow certain good manufacturing practices (GMPs) to ensure that dietary supplements are processed consistently and meet quality standards. Requirements for GMPs went into effect in 2008 for large manufacturers and are being phased in for small manufacturers through 2010.
Once a dietary supplement is on the market, the FDA monitors safety and product information, such as label claims and package inserts. If it finds a product to be unsafe, it can take action against the manufacturer and/or distributor and may issue a warning or require that the product be removed from the marketplace. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is responsible for regulating product advertising; it requires that all information be truthful and not misleading.
The federal government has taken legal action against a number of dietary supplement promoters or Web sites that promote or sell dietary supplements because they have made false or deceptive statements about their products or because marketed products have proven to be unsafe.
What is the main idea of the passage?
- A. Manufacturers of dietary supplements must adhere to good manufacturing practices.
- B. The FDA has a specialized program for regulating dietary supplements.
- C. The federal government prosecutes individuals who deceive the public.
- D. The FDA operates under the federal government.
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: The main idea of the passage is that the FDA has a specialized program for regulating dietary supplements. The passage explains how the FDA regulates dietary supplements differently from drugs, focusing on the requirements for marketing, good manufacturing practices, monitoring safety, and taking action against unsafe products. Choice A is incorrect because while it mentions good manufacturing practices, it's not the central idea of the passage. Choice C is incorrect as there is no emphasis on prosecuting individuals in the passage. Choice D is incorrect because stating that the FDA is part of the federal government is not the main idea discussed in the passage.
The federal government regulates dietary supplements through the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The regulations for dietary supplements are not the same as those for prescription or over-the-counter drugs. In general, the regulations for dietary supplements are less strict.
To begin with, a manufacturer does not have to prove the safety and effectiveness of a dietary supplement before it is marketed. A manufacturer is permitted to say that a dietary supplement addresses a nutrient deficiency, supports health, or is linked to a particular body function (such as immunity), if there is research to support the claim. Such a claim must be followed by the words “This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.â€
Also, manufacturers are expected to follow certain good manufacturing practices (GMPs) to ensure that dietary supplements are processed consistently and meet quality standards. Requirements for GMPs went into effect in 2008 for large manufacturers and are being phased in for small manufacturers through 2010.
Once a dietary supplement is on the market, the FDA monitors safety and product information, such as label claims and package inserts. If it finds a product to be unsafe, it can take action against the manufacturer and/or distributor and may issue a warning or require that the product be removed from the marketplace. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is responsible for regulating product advertising; it requires that all information be truthful and not misleading.
The federal government has taken legal action against a number of dietary supplement promoters or Web sites that promote or sell dietary supplements because they have made false or deceptive statements about their products or because marketed products have proven to be unsafe.
Which statement is not a detail from the passage?
- A. Promoters of dietary supplements can make any claims that are supported by research.
- B. GMP requirements for large manufacturers went into effect in 2008.
- C. The FDA regulates dietary supplements in the same way as prescription medications.
- D. Consumers should research supplement claims before making a purchase.
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: The statement "Promoters of dietary supplements can make any claims that are supported by research" is not a detail from the passage. The passage mentions that manufacturers, not promoters, can make claims supported by research. The primary focus is on the regulations and manufacturing standards for dietary supplements. Choice B is a detail from the passage as it mentions the GMP requirements for large manufacturers going into effect in 2008. Choice C is incorrect as the passage states that FDA regulations for dietary supplements are not the same as those for prescription medications. Choice D is also supported by the passage, emphasizing that consumers should research supplement claims before making a purchase to ensure accuracy and safety.