PT140.S1.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

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6

PASSAGE 2

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

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

The mayor claims that the city’s planned chemical plant cannot cause health problems because most of the protestors, who claim that the factory can cause health problems, were paid by developers concerned about property value.

This is an ad hominem argument because the mayor attacks the motives of the opposing side rather than engaging with the substance of the contested issue. The mayor fails to provide evidence that the plant cannot cause health problems, leaving the conclusion entirely unsupported. The motives of the protestors or their benefactors are irrelevant to the question of whether the factory is dangerous or not.

There’s no reason to believe that the mayor mischaracterizes the claim that the factory could cause health problems. The flaw lies in attacking the protestors’ motives rather than their claims.

The mayor doesn’t refer to any potential consequences of agreeing with the opposing side. The argument’s flaw is attacking the opposing side’s motives rather than the substance of their claim.

This describes how the mayor dismisses the opposing claim simply because some of the protestors making it may have an ulterior motive. Whether they actually do or not, there’s still no evidence showing that the plant isn’t dangerous.

The argument doesn’t generalize; the conclusion is only focused on refuting the opposing side’s claim that the factory can cause harm. The flaw is failing to actually address it, attacking some of the motives behind it instead.

The mayor doesn’t take the protestors to be claiming that health problems will inevitably result. The flaw is that the mayor attacks their motives instead of the substance of their claim.

PrepTest 140 - Section 1 - Question 18

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action