Based on some understanding, whose details are not mentioned, and a fact about doctors' focus area, which is costly and has side-effects, th arguments concludes that doctors are doing disservice and contributing to rising cost of healthcare in US.

The argument is somewhat flawed because it does not mention about the kind of effect these therapies would have. It just mentions to have effect, whether it is positive, negative, or time taking, is not mentioned. Also,it does not mention whether the rise in costs is because of the ailments, which could actually have been treated by therapies of Music and Art.

The argument is based on logic that thereapeutic effect is equivalent to medical treatments in healing a physical and mental illness.

The argument would be strengthened if it is mentioned that these therapeutic effects are as efficient as medical treatments and that individuals prefer to consult doctors for physical or mental illnesses and they do not go by common understanding about Music & Art therapy, despite having been understood to have effects.

Supporting evidence used here is rising cost of health care in US, which primarily is because the patients spend money based on doctors suggestion.

The passage presents a fact that the number of recruits this year is much lower than the preceding three years and hence suggests a solution for it. The suggestion talks about the necessity to change the recruitment strategy as there is more involvement of potential recruits in social media and online discussions for learning about their career opportunities. Hence, it recommends the Zephyr Industries to hire Social media consultants and entirely suspend its existing recruitment efforts.

The argument is flawed because it does not mention why the Zephyr Industries is recruiting so less number from campuses. It might be the reason if it is somewhere stated in the passage. However, since it is not mentioned, one can not assume it to be the reason and suggest something which indicates a that their existing practice is flawed. For example, the company might not need candidates at all but it is recruiting these 3 interns only to maintain a campus-industry relationship. Or, because the company wants its name to be there in the list of companies who offer campus placements.

Secondly, per the passage, it is assumed that the company is not getting potential candidates, despite willing to hire more, as these people are less involved in campus placements and more involved in social media and online discussions. Again, there is no evidence for such claim. There might be a growing number of people taking part in social and online discussions, but it is not mentioned that these people opt for companies based on information gained from these sessions. If it is mentioned that for example, some 50-60% or more number of people are opting from companies about which they learned from social and online dissussions, then it would be a case to consider this assumption to be perfectly true.

Lastly, it assumes that hiring the consultants would work in favor of the Zephyr Industries. It would definitely be so, if these candidates are not aware of this new tactic being applied by the companies to lure candidates. The aim of this off-campus involvement,by candidates, is to gain knowledge of companies which do not recruit from campuses. Since, they are not interested in Zephyr industries, it is difficult to comment whether these consultants would be able to provide potential candidates to the Zephyr Industries.

Hence, the argument could have been strengthened of it is mentioned about the reason for low number of recruitment, the reason for growing number of candidates shifting towards social and online discussions, and what outcome would it be if hiring of these consultants would entirely suspend the existing strategy. The passage lacks in examples to prove its point.

Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its twenty-fifth birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”

Assumes that minimizing cost means more efficiency

Also assumes that selling price will not lower down

How can the two processing industries have same principle?

An organization that is 25 years old is sufficiently mature to have learnt to do things in a better way and hence is more efficient

It is required to mention that we are becoming better because of experience, with the same practice or the technology employed itself is changing

Somewhat flawed but can be strengthened if examples are cited such as: Lesser no of people are now required for same amount of production, the offset in costs due to less people is higher than the wages increase of these workers, selling price is also rising with the inflation, etc.

When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location. Such centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and helping the company maintain better supervision of all employees

The argument presents a fact that the Apogee Company was more profitable when it had all its operations in one location, as compared to today when there are several field offices. Hence, it suggests closure of all the field offices of Apogee Company and to conduct all operations from single location. The reason quoted is improvement in profitability due to low costs and better supervision of all the employees.

The argument is flawed because of some assumptions which cannot logically be understood without proper evidence.

Firstly, it is assumed that the decrease in profit is caused by the increased number of field offices. It is nowhere mentioned about the expenditures on these offices as a % of total expenses of the company and hence the assumption can only be substantiated by evidence suggesting so. The decrease in profits could be caused by reasons such as customer dissatisfaction, inferior products, poor management, employee dissatisfaction, etc. However, the argument only considers increased number of field offices as the reason for reduction in profits

Secondly, it is also assumed that closure of these offices will reduce the costs to the company such an extent that profitability, as a whole, would improve. Since, the costs of running an office is generally much lower than production, logistics, and marketing costs, it does not sound very practical to close all its field offices to improve profits.

Lastly, the company also aims to increase profitability by keeping a supervision of its employees from one central office. Here, it is assumed that keeping a watch on employees increase their productivity and hence profitability of the company. The absence of an example makes this point weak and bleak. Rather, it can be said that there are many cases in which despite having several offices, in many countries, the companies make profits. In order to gain market share, there is a need of field offices, so that products made can directly be sent to customers in shorter time.

Hence, if it were mentioned in the passage that presence of field offices is the reason for decrease in profitability and some reasons were stated as to why closure of these offices would lead to increase in profits, the argument could be stated self-explanatory. But in its present form, the argument is flawed and can be strengthened with appropriate examples.

The assumption is flawed in the argument, However, if the assumption is logically corrected, the conclusion drawn by the council is strengthened

Firstly, it assumes a cause and effect relationship between % increase in Visual art programs viewership and attendance at art city art museum. However, it is not necessary that attendance at museum increased due to increase in TV program viewership. For example, the attendance might have increased because of growing number of tourists from past 5 years, or reduction on entrance fee of the museum.

Secondly, it assumes that cuts in corporate spending on public television, would lead to reduction in TV program viewership, which will not always be the case. It is required to mention how this reduction in funds would lead to decrease in viewership. There might be no effect on art programs’ viewership, as other non-art programs or government subsidized commercials are affected due to cut in spending. Hence, it requires justification for the assumption.

Finally, it concludes that reallocation of funds for Public Television would help in retaining attendance at museums. This conclusion will be true if the argument provides support for the above mentioned assumptions.

According to a recent study, professional bodybuilders who used Train & Gain, a new protein supplement, over the course of three months experienced an increase in measured strength of up to 20%. Since Train & Gain is now available without prescription at all major pharmacies, superior results are no longer limited to professional athletes. Try Train & Gain today and you too can boost your strength and achieve professional-level performance in just a few months.”

The advertisement presents a fact that the professional bodybuilders have gained measurable strength of upto 20% after using their new protein supplement. So, it suggests the non-professional sportsperson to buy their product, as it available without precsription, and boost their strength and achieve professional level performanve in a afew months.

The argument considers partial data and concludes something which might not have the desired effect.

Firstly, it assumes that Train & Gain's new protein product was responsible for the increased strength. Since a professional bodybuilder needs to get results in desired timeframe, there might be other efforts put towards increasing strength. For example, use of some other supplements, application of too much weight training, or eating high protein food i.e. egg can also lead to increase strength.

Secondly, the argument also assumes that dietery supplements are mostly available on prescription, and many non-professional athletes are deprived of such strength enhancing products. Hence, since Train & Gain's new protein supplement is available for all, these people will be looking forward to it. This assumption requires some justification as it is never mentioned that taking prescription is a task most non-professional athletes do not prefer.

If at all prescriptions are required for buying these strength enhancing supplements, there could be apprehensions amongst customers that since there is no prescription required, the supplement might actually not have desired effects.

Finally, it suggests the readers to start using the product to be able to boost strength and achieve professional-level performance in a afew months. The advertisement can lure some customers as many people would believe that they caould match performance of these

professionals. However, this advertisement would have mass appeal if it is strengthened by the fact that this new supplement is responsible for the observed results and that non-professional sportsperson are also willing to buy thsese supplements if they are easily available to this group of people.