Great question. One of the biggest keys to correct identifying the main point is to figure out what the evidence is and what it's supporting. In reading the stimulus, we see that there's quite a bit of evidence in the stimulus, starting with the poodle and German shepherd reference as well as the analogies used to describe seeing-eye dogs and police dogs. All of this is used to support the initial statement in the first part of the first sentence, which is "The term 'pit bull' does not designate a breed of dog." Since the rest of the stimulus supports this claim, we know it's the main point.
(C) says, "A dog is a pit bull because of what it does, not because of its breed."
(C) does a great job in paraphrasing what we've identified as the main point of the passage, so it's the correct answer choice.
This stimulus had no key words that could help us tune in to what the main point is. Words that signify a conclusion or subsidiary conclusion are ones like 'therefore,' 'however,' etc. It's important to note that these words don't necessarily introduce the main point; they can also introduce intermediate conclusions that are then used to support the main point.
A helpful tip is to ask 'why?' to yourself while reading. If your 'why' is answered by the following text, that's a strong sign that what you're reading is evidence for what you asked 'why' about. Ultimately, you need to make sure that you see what is being supported by the rest of the passage/stimulus. That is the main point.
Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any more questions!
0tas>June 30, 2020
Hello Ravi. In my very first attempt on this same question (question #1), my instinct correctly told me that what you said is the conclusion of the stimulus is indeed the conclusion of the stimulus. After all, the rest of the statements in the stimulus appear to point to the first statement in stimulus as the conclusion. Since that is so, I am not totally sure why choice C would be correct. Choice C does say a dog is a pit bull "not because of its breed." But it also says that a dog is a pit bull "because of what it does." One sentence in the stimulus does say that a dog is a pit bull "because of what it does." However, when first attempting this question, that particular sentence, which says, "It is like the terms 'Seeing Eye dog' and 'police dog,' which designate dogs according to what they do," appeared to me to be one of the premises supporting the part of the sentence that you say is the conclusion. Since the part of the statement of choice C which says that a "dog is a pit bull because of what it does" is not part of the first sentence of the stimulus that contains the conclusion, how come choice C is the correct answer?
