First of all, the negation of (A):

(A) All people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste.
Negation: Not all people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste.
This means there is at least one person who does not agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste. It is still possible that taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining the taste of a piece of food. Even after we negate (A), the conclusion is possible so (A) is not an assumption.
Think of it this way: The given research was conducted. Blindfolded people with pinched noses found it very hard to differentiate the taste. One person comes up and says that he himself cannot differentiate between the two while looking and smelling. Does it mean that senses other than taste buds are not involved? No. There could be many other people who feel that they can easily differentiate between an apple and a potato taste. So other senses could be involved. So (A) is not your answer.

Let's negate (C)

(C) The word "taste" can be used to describe an experience that involves sight or smell or both.
Negation: The word "taste" can not be used to describe an experience that involves sight or smell or both.
It says that "taste" does not involve sight and smell. But our conclusion is based on the premise that sight and smell are involved. Hence we need (C) to be true to arrive at our conclusion.
_________________

Hello,

A can be negated to mean "No one can tell the difference between the taste of apple and potato". This includes people with eyesight etc. Now when one applies this to the first statement, one understands that no one can tell the difference is taste between potato and apple while some blind people can tell the difference, although with a bit of difficulty. All that might let us to conclude is that eyesight might be an obstacle in recognizing or differentiating between the taste of two or more food items. We can in no way conclude that taste buds are not the only receptors of taste.

Hope it is clear. Let me know if you require further explanation.

@
Kris01 ur explanation is faulty :

a ) All people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste.
the negation of A wud be not All people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste. that means that some people do not agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste

Could you explain further ? I still feel (a) is the answer.

Anyone from VeritasPrep can help here ?
This is a Veritas Prep QBnak question.
I went through through through explanation in the Vertias Prep QBank, but still have doubt.

All people becomes not all people which does not mean no people. So this assumption on negation does not destroy the argument.

Also C provides a clear explanation as to why the people might consider different things to be of same taste. Because if smelling is helpful for people to distinguish b/w things of same "taste" (Here taste takes other form as mentioned in the definition of taste) then taste buds might not be the only organs to determine the taste of the item.
_________________

Can a conclusion also become an assumption?
Based on the experiments I concluded that apart from taste buds, taste involves other senses as well. This then becomes a fact inferred and thus ground for my conclusion. How is this an assumption then? Or maybe I am missing something.

Regards,
DJ

Negate (B): There ARE other senses involved in tasting other than taste, smell, and sight.

Conclusion of the argument: taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining the taste of a piece of food.

Can the conclusion hold even after negating (B)? Sure, even if some other sense are also involved, the conclusion is saying that taste buds are not the only sense organs. So (B) is not the assumption.
_________________

How would you negate D?

The research wasn't based on experiments that were conducted on a broad spectrum of the general population.

So this would mean that we only took a small spectrum and maybe that affected the results?

Negate D: Research was based on experiments that were not conducted on a broad spectrum of the general population.

The conclusion does not say that for people of most classes/regions, taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining the taste of a piece of food.

It is acceptable if the research was conducted on a few people and it was determined that other senses are involved. Even if some people found it difficult to differentiate between the two things, we can say that other senses are involved. They may or may not be involved for all - it doesn't change anything.
_________________

Don't know whether it would be stupid question but word order of option C has confused me .


"" The word "taste" can be used to describe an
experience that involves sight or smell or both. """



Here ,is it not possible to assume that " taste can be used to describe an experience that involves sight only or smell only or both ?""

, sight or smell or both ? so Taste can be describe in term of sight only . in this case , don't need more than one organ to experience taste of a food .

hello and thank you for your explanation. this is indeed a very complicated question! however, I have another issue with question:

There is another major underlying assumption here: Apples and Potatoes are different! so by giving any definition to taste, you are implying that some people may be able to differentiate between apples and potatoes. (because they are different). so by assuming that taste is an experience that involves sight or smell or both, you imply that there is a combination of features that will help some people pick apples from potatoes.

what if there is 1 person who thinks apples and Potatoes taste the same, because they are the same, therefore all their features are the same, including any definition you give to "taste". If this is the case, your whole argument will collapse, because taste buds may very well be the only organs involved in determining the taste when two objects are different!

So when we say all people agree that apples and Potatoes taste different, we logically and clearly imply that all people think apples and Potatoes are different in at least in one feature! this is why i think "A" is the correct answer here.

Note that usually, people's opinion will not count for much. What will be important is the fact. The only opinion we care about is the author's. We cannot strengthen/weaken the author's opinion by giving similar/dissimilar opinions of other people.
Say, you negate (A) and get that at least one person says that apple and potato have the same taste. The point is - it doesn't matter. What we would be interested in is getting a fact - apple and potato have the same taste. We don't really care about what one person thinks. We are only interested in facts.

When we conclude: taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining the taste of a piece of food.
How do we define "taste"? Taste buds we know tell us whether the food is salty/sweet/sour etc. But how do we say that "taste" is not defined by only these features? We are assuming that taste is defined by sight/smell too.
_________________

In assumption questions, remember that you can negate the potential assumptions. If that negation destroys the argument, then you've found an assumption.

(A)
Negation: There are people who can't distinguish the taste of an apple from that of a potato.
If that's the case, then the argument is destroyed, because we have an alternate explanation for the results of the experiment.

--

Getting rid of (B) and (C) isn't so bad.
The argument is only concerned with "taste buds" vs. "NOT taste buds".
The particular identity of "NOT taste buds" is fungible-it doesn't matter whether it's your eyes, or your nose, or your feng shui, or whatever. If it's not taste buds, it's all the same. So, we don't need to assume anything about the particular identity of the NOT-taste buds.

(D) For this to be relevant, you'd need even more assumptions. For instance, you'd have to assume that different people taste things differently. (If not, then there's no advantage in testing a diversity of people.) We don't know about those additional assumptions, so this choice is weak sauce.

(E) We obviously don't have to assume anything about onions.
_________________

Solution: (OE - Veritas Prep)
Argument:
– If you remove sight and smell, people will have great difficulty in differentiating a bite of an apple from a bite of a raw potato.
Conclusion: Taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining the taste of a piece of food.
We will look at the options one by one:

(A) All people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste.

Note that usually, people’s opinion will not count for much. Facts are the ones which are important. The only opinion we care about is the author’s. We cannot strengthen/weaken the author’s opinion by giving similar/dissimilar opinions of other people.
Say, the conclusion of an argument is:
Daniel Day-Lewis is the greatest actor of the 21st century.
The premises would perhaps list his great performances, talk about his acting prowess, his Oscars and so on.
Can you strengthen the conclusion by saying that “My friend also believes that he is the greatest actor.”? No. You cannot strengthen your opinion by giving the opinion of other people. You need to give facts to strengthen your view.
So this option is already suspect. It is giving you the opinion of people “All people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste.” So it doesn’t seem to be the right choice.
Anyway, let’s try to negate (A) just to be sure since this is an assumption question.
Negation: Not all people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste.
This means there is at least one person who does not agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste. Perhaps he feels that the experience of eating an apple – the smell, the look, the sweetness etc is the same as the experience of eating a potato. It is still possible that taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining the taste of a piece of food. Even after we negate (A), the conclusion is possible so (A) is not an assumption.

Think of it in another way: During the research, blindfolded people with pinched noses found it very hard to differentiate the taste. One person comes up and says that he himself cannot differentiate between the two while looking and smelling. Does it mean that senses other than taste buds are not involved? No. There could be many other people who feel that they can easily differentiate between an apple and a potato taste. So other senses could be involved and (A) is not your answer.

(B) There are no other senses involved in tasting other than taste, smell, and sight.

This is not an assumption. All we are saying is that taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining the taste of a piece of food. Any other organs could be involved including smell and sight.

(C) The word “taste” can be used to describe an experience that involves sight or smell or both.

This option highlights a very basic thing that needs to be true for our conclusion to hold. When we conclude: taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining the taste of a piece of food, how do we define “taste”? Taste buds, we know, tell us whether the food is salty/sweet/sour etc. But how do we say that “taste” is not defined by only these features? We are assuming that taste is defined by not just how the food sits on our tongue but by other features such as sight/smell too. If this option were not true, then we would have needed only taste buds to find the taste of food. Hence, our conclusion would fall apart. Hence, (C) is the correct answer.

(D) The research was based on experiments that were conducted on a broad spectrum of the general population.

The conclusion does not say that for people of most classes/regions, taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining the taste of a piece of food. It is acceptable if the research was conducted on a few people and it was determined that other senses are involved. Even if some people found it difficult to differentiate between the two things, we can say that other senses are involved.

(E) People who have been blindfolded and whose nostrils are pinched can differentiate a bite of an apple from a bite of an onion more easily than they can differentiate a bite of an apple from a bite of a raw potato.

This option tells us that apples and onions are more different on the tongue than apples and potatoes. This is out of scope and is certainly not an assumption.

Answer (C)
_________________

Premise: BF persons whose nostrils are pinched have difficulty to differentiate between taste of an apple and a potato
Conclusion: There are other sense organs which help to determine the taste
We can prethink that the taste of an apple differs from that of a potato under normal circumstances.

A. All people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste. - Correct.

B. There are no other senses involved in tasting other than taste, smell, and sight. - Opposite.

C. The word "taste" can be used to describe an experience that involves sight or smell or both. - Out of context.

D. The research was based on experiments that were conducted on a broad spectrum of the general population. - We are not worried about the magnitude of the research

E. People who have been blindfolded and whose nostrils are pinched can differentiate a bite of an apple from a bite of an onion more easily than they can differentiate a bite of an apple from a bite of a raw potato. - Irrelevant comparison between apple and onion.

In my opinion, answer is A

I believe the answer can be either A or C. However, since the argument directly relates "smelling" to "taste buds", which I believe do not necessarily relate to begin with, in order to make the conclusion of the argument true, the argument must assume that "taste" has a broader definition to include "smell" as a way of tasting. So, C is the better answer.

According to recent research, a blindfolded person whose nostrils have been pinched so that smelling is impossible will have great difficulty in differentiating a bite of an apple from a bite of a raw potato. This clearly demonstrates that taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining the taste of a piece of food.

Which of the following premises, is an assumption required by the argument?

A. All people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste.

B. There are no other senses involved in tasting other than taste, smell, and sight.

C. The word "taste" can be used to describe an experience that involves sight or smell or both.

D. The research was based on experiments that were conducted on a broad spectrum of the general population.

E. People who have been blindfolded and whose nostrils are pinched can differentiate a bite of an apple from a bite of an onion more easily than they can differentiate a bite of an apple from a bite of a raw potato.



Great Q. I am writing my approach. Experts please correct me, as I was not much confident of what I was doing.
Premises:
No vision + No smell makes differentiation in taste very difficult.
Conclusion:
Taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining taste.
Assumption:
1. Taste buds are the well known sense organs involved in determining the taste.
2. Vision and smell can play some role in determining taste.
3. The blindfolded person whose nostrils have been pinched didn't get his taste buds unresponsive.

Choice C is close to 2. Negation of C gives, The word "taste" can NOT be used to describe an experience that involves sight or smell or both.
Clearly we cannot conclude that taste buds are not the only sense organs involved in determining taste, as "taste" is not at all related to vision or smell or both.

Answer will indeed be (C)

Here is why (A) will be wrong

http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2015/02 ... questions/

Excellent Question to open our eyes...


And here is more from Karishma from Veritas

according-to-recent-research-a-blindfolded-person-whose-147631.html#p1262928
_________________

very tricky indeed:
A. All people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste.
negating: Not all (0-99) people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste.
No (0) people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste.This does weaken the conclusion but....
(99) people agree that an apple and a potato differ in taste. This does not weaken the conclusion because there is still 1 who believes that apple and potato taste the same.

C. The word "taste" can be used to describe an experience that involves sight or smell or both.
negating: The word " taste" cannot be used to describe an experience that involves sight or smell or both.
clearly, this weakens the conclusion and therefore is the answer.