Pedigreed dogs, including those officially classified as working dog

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The correct answer choice is (B)

The argument has an interesting structure. Visually, the argument appears as follows: Premise: Pedigreed dogs, including those officially classified as working dogs, must conform to standards set by organizations that issue pedigrees. Premise: Those standards generally specify the physical appearance necessary for a dog to be recognized as belonging to a breed but stipulate nothing about other genetic traits, such as those that enable breeds originally developed as working dogs to perform the work for which they were developed. Premise: Dog breeders try to maintain only those traits specified by pedigree organizations, and traits that breeders do not try to maintain risk being lost.

Sub-conclusion / Premise: Certain traits like herding ability risk being lost among pedigreed dogs. Conclusion: Therefore, pedigree organizations should set standards requiring working ability in pedigreed dogs classified as working dogs. Given the size of the stimulus, this is a tough problem to analyze. The second to last sentence contains both a premise and a conclusion. The final sentence contains the main conclusion. Perhaps because of the size of the problem, the test makers kindly inserted the conclusion indicator “therefore” before the main conclusion.

Answer choice (A): This is a Half Right, Half Wrong answer. The phrase referenced in the question is a “claim on which the argument depends,” but it is not one for which no support is given. In fact, several premises back up the statement.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer. The statement in question is a sub-conclusion, described in this answer as a subsidiary conclusion.

Answer choice (C): The phrase in question is in agreement with the argument, and does not reference a possible objection. If you were to choose this answer, you would have to ask yourself, “What is the possible objection mentioned in this answer choice?”

Answer choice (D): The argument as a whole works towards supporting the recommendation that “pedigree organizations should set standards requiring working ability in pedigreed dogs classified as working dogs.” The phrase in the question stem does not summarize the antithesis of that position.

Answer choice (E): This answer has the order of the argument backwards. The phrase referenced in the question stem provides evidence necessary to support a claim stated later in the argument.