Grasses and woody plants are planted on dirt embankments to keep the embankments from eroding. ███ ███████████ ███ █████ ██ ████ ███ ███████ ████ ███████ ███ █████ ██ █ ███████ █████████ ████ ███ █████ █████ ██ █████████ ███████ ███ █████ ███████ ███████ █████ ██████ █████ █████ ██ ████ ███ ███████████ ████ ████████ ██ ████ ████ ████ ███████ ███████ ████ ██████ ████ ███ ████ ███ ██████ ███ █████ ███████ ██████ ██████████ ████████ ██ █████████ ██ █████████ ███ ███████ ████ ███████ ███████ ██ ███ ████████████
The argument concludes that introducing predators to eradicate rodents on dirt embankments will prevent the embankments from eroding. Why? Because the rodents, which are attracted by grass clippings that cause plant roots to rot, burrow into the ground and further damage the roots. These roots are what prevent erosion.
The argument concludes that eliminating rodents would stop erosion, because rodents are one factor in causing the erosion. However, this overlooks the other cause of erosion: the clippings causing plant roots to rot.
Which one of the following ██ ██ █████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ █████████
Two events that ██████ ████████ ███ ███████ ██ ██ ███ ██████ ███ ██████
The argument doesn’t mistake a correlation for a causal relationship: the cause-and-effect relationships discussed are genuine.
Answer choices which, rightly or wrongly, accuse the argument of making a causal reasoning error.
A highly general ████████ ██ █████ ████ ██ ██ ████████████████ ███ ██ ██████
The argument doesn’t make a general proposal based on unrepresentative facts. The facts offered are about a specific set of embankments, and the proposal is about those same embankments.
Answer choices which, rightly or wrongly, accuse the argument of sampling errors or overgeneralization.
The conclusion is ██ ████ ████ █ ███████████ ██ ███ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ████████ ████████ ██ ███████ ███
The conclusion, that bringing in predators to eliminate rodents would prevent erosion, is not a restatement of any of the supporting evidence.
Answer choices which, rightly or wrongly, accuse the argument of circular reasoning.
One possible solution ██ █ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ██ ███ ████ ████████ ████████ ██ ████ ████████
The argument never claims that bringing in predators to eliminate rodents is the only possible solution to erosion.
Answer choices which, rightly or wrongly, accuse the argument of confusing sufficiency and necessity.
An action that █████ █████████ ███ █████ ██ █ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ██ ██ █████ █████ ███ ██████ ████████
The argument concludes that eliminating rodents would solve the entire problem of erosion, but rodents are only one cause. This conclusion doesn’t address the other cause of root rot.
Answer choices which, rightly or wrongly, accuse the argument of making a causal reasoning error.
Answer choices which, rightly or wrongly, accuse the argument of neglecting other relevant factors that could contribute to an overall outcome.
Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.
It takes about five minutes.
Take the free diagnosticWant to know why the right answer is right?
7Sage membership unlocks explanations of every question. Every answer choice. On every official PrepTest. Start with a free account.
By signing up you agree to our
terms of service.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy
and
Terms of Service
apply.