The ability to access information via computer is a tremendous resourc

I believe it is B.

The passage states that traditional sources for the impaired are limited. Combine this with the wide availability of computers (choice B), and the author's argument that visually impaired people can access information more easily with computer systems is strengthened.

"B". The passage also specifies that "limited" information is available on audio-tapes. A is out.

There is a logical connection between the conclusion and the assumption at B:
"visually impaired people can now access information from computers more easily" because "relatively easy-to-use computer systems ... are widely available".

hence, B does stregthen.

probable assumption I could come out after reading conclusion (the visually impaired people could now access information using computer) was such material would be readily available in comparison to the traditional sources


based on this assumption narrowed my answer choices to A.B and E.
crossed out E because conclusion talks abt rate of conversion to speed up in future while conclusion talks abt info accessible now.

out of A and B, I crossed out A becoz it talks abt computerized speech synthesizer rather than computer itself. Also it talks abt relative cost, which does not ensure tht material would be widely available.

IMO B

The ability to access information via computer is a tremendous resource for visually impaired people. Only a limited amount of printed information is accessible in braille, large type, or audiotape. But a person with the right hardware and software can access a large quantity of information from libraries and museums around the world, and can have the computer read the information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version. Thus, visually impaired people can now access information from computers more easily than they can from most traditional sources.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?


Pre-thinking:

Our task is to strengthen the conclusion at hand: "Thus, visually impaired people can now access information from computers more easily than they can from most traditional sources."

Now, let's find an assumption and work from there.

Falsification scenario: what if such "right hardwares" are crazy expensive or there are just 10 of them on the planet? Clearly under these circumstances the argument would fall into pieces.

Assumption: Such right hardwares are widely available.
Strengthener: Nowadays people can buy these hardware in any tech-shop at a very convenient price


POE:

A) A computerized speech synthesizer is often less expensive than a complete library of audiotapes.
This option does not have any impact on the conclusion for different reasons.
First, it talks only about synthesizers while the conclusion talks about ALL kind of visual impairments.
Second, how much does a complete library of tape cost? Is it crazy expensive or is it quite cheap? From this stand we can either infer that such synthesizers are expensive or cheap. Hence OUT

B) Relatively easy-to-use computer systems that can read information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version of it are widely available.
In line with our pre-thought strengthener

C) Many visually impaired people prefer traditional sources of information to computers that can read information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version of it.
IRRELEVANT

D) Most visually impaired people who have access to information via computer also have access to this same information via more traditional sources.
IRRELEVANT

E) The rate at which printed information is converted into formats easily accessible to visually impaired people will increase.
The conclusion is present-based while this option talks about the future. OUT

We need to strengthen the following argument:visually impaired people can now access information from computers more easily than they can from most traditional sources.

I started from #5 and worked my way up.

#5 is about how the speed of conversion will change in the future, but it is not relevant to the issue at hand. Wrong.

#4 is not a positive. Wrong.

#3 isn't positive either. Wrong.

#2 is about a positive of computers now. Keep it.

#1 seems like it is a positive, but this conclusion is about access. Further, Audiotapes are just one traditional source. This very prompt mentions a few others as well. Eliminate.

It's #2/B.

Passage says >> Given a visually impaired person has access to the correct H/W and S/W they can access info from across the world in braille THAN traditional sources

A Maybe - KEEP for now although "often" spoils it
B Yes - stronger argument than A
C Weakens - out
D "More" traditional sources >> what's the point?
E Talks about the future; arg is about the present

B is the best choice IMO