PT106.S3.Q18 > Question

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

PASSAGE 2

Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21

PASSAGE 4

Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

The author concludes aesthetic judgments are good to the extent they help a person survive. Why? Because the brain evolved to help humans survive, so the ability to make aesthetic judgments developed in response to environments where past humans lived.

The author assumes aesthetic judgments should be evaluated based on their ability to fulfill the original purpose for which they evolved: to assist survival. He assumes there’s no better basis for determining the value of those judgments. In addition, he assumes each individual mental capacity in the human brain could only have evolved as an adaptation to a past environment.

This gets the desired reasoning backward. If the reverse were true—and all human mental capacities were adaptations to past environments—then the author could more easily conclude the capacity for aesthetic judgments was such an adaptation.

This is irrelevant. Since the author concludes the ability to make aesthetic judgments is a past adaptation that helped humans survive, this principle does not apply to that ability.

This helps justify the author’s conclusion. It implies aesthetic judgments should be judged by how well they help humans survive—and not by some other standard—since they apparently evolved for that purpose.

This rules out only one implausible way aesthetic judgments could be evaluated, out of many possibilities. It doesn’t help the author reach the particular conclusion that aesthetic judgments should be evaluated based on how well they help people survive.

This is irrelevant. The author is concerned with evaluating individuals’ aesthetic judgments, not their ability to make those judgments.

PrepTest 106 - Section 3 - Question 18

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action