PT129.S2.Q26 > 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

PASSAGE 2

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

PASSAGE 3

Question 13 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 historian concludes that Flavius was widely unpopular among his subjects. As support, the historian cites the large number of satirical plays written about Flavius during his administration. The historian also says that Flavius took away financial support from the arts in an effort to discourage them.

The historian references the number of satirical plays written about Flavius as support for the conclusion that Flavius was widely unpopular among his subjects. However, we know that these playwrights had a reason to dislike Flavius: his removal of state funding for the arts. This fact gives us reason to doubt that the opinion of playwrights is representative of the views of the “subjects” in general.

Knowing the proportion of all plays that weren’t about Flavius wouldn’t be helpful. The conclusion uses the number of satirical plays written during his administration to show that Flavius was unpopular; the proportion in (A) wouldn’t say anything about how people felt towards Flavius.

Because Flavius cut state financial support for the arts, playwrights had a reason to oppose him. Thus, the number of satirical plays written about Flavius doesn’t say much about the opinion of the general population. The playwrights are not likely to be representative of all subjects.

This is descriptively inaccurate. The argument does not make this assumption. The argument explicitly states that Flavius tried to discourage the arts by removing funding.

It doesn’t matter whether or not the attempt to discourage the arts was successful; it is enough to know that Flavius cut funding for the arts in an attempt to discourage them. This attempt shows us that playwrights may not be representative of the general population.

This is irrelevant to the argument. Knowing the information in (E) would not help the premise (about the number of satirical plays) to support the conclusion about Flavius’ general unpopularity.

PrepTest 129 - Section 2 - Question 26

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action