PT106.S2.Q25 > 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

Marianne claims that she should not be held responsible for her humming, which distracts other players during chess matches. Marianne supports this conclusion by explaining that she was unaware of her humming, and her humming is therefore involuntary.

Marianne assumes that professional chess players should not be held responsible for involuntary behavior, even when it distracts their opponents.

Marianne also assumes that she should not be held responsible for future humming, even though she has now been made aware of the fact that she hums. In other words, she assumes that nothing will change regarding the involuntary nature of her humming.

This does not weaken Marianne’s argument, because the chess officials aren’t trying to control her behavior outside of chess matches. The argument is limited to Marianne’s habit of humming during matches, so this claim is just irrelevant.

This does not weaken Marianne’s argument. The customs of amateur chess matches have nothing to do with the argument, which is disputing whether a rule about professional chess should be enforced against involuntary behavior. This claim is irrelevant.

This does not weaken Marianne’s argument, because she is only concerned with a particular involuntary action, humming, of which she is unaware. Saying that people are aware of some involuntary actions has no bearing on the argument.

This weakens the argument by targeting Marianne’s assumption that her habit of humming will necessarily remain involuntary. If Marianne can easily learn to recognize and control her humming, then her reasons for asking not to be held responsible disappear.

This does not weaken Marianne’s argument, which is based on the involuntary nature of her humming, not whether the humming truly impacts her opponents. This has no bearing on the actual substance of Marianne’s argument.

PrepTest 106 - Section 2 - Question 25

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action