PT102.S4.Q18 > Question

SECTION 1 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2

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

SECTION 2 · 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 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

It’s impossible to mistreat plants. Why? To feel pain, you need a nervous system. (Contrapositive: no nervous system, no pain.) And plants don’t have a nervous system.

The conclusion is about mistreatment, but the premises say nothing about mistreatment.

How to get from the premises to the conclusion? The first premise (plants have no nervous system) triggers the contrapositive of the second premise (to feel pain, you need a nervous system). So we can infer that plants can’t feel pain. That’s as far as the premises get us.

We can make the argument valid if we then assume that when something can’t feel pain, it can’t be mistreated. (Contrapositive: for something to be mistreated, it must be able to feel pain.)

We can infer from the premises that plants can’t experience pain, so plants fail the sufficient condition here. This assumption doesn’t get us anywhere. However, if the sufficient and necessary conditions here were swapped, this would be the right answer.

This just restates the premise that having a nervous system is necessary to feel pain. It doesn’t explain what, if anything, nervous systems and pain have to do with mistreatment.

This says nothing about mistreatment, so it can’t be right. The conclusion is all about mistreatment, yet the premises never even raise the subject of mistreatment. (C) fails to explain what, if anything, nervous systems and pain have to do with mistreatment.

Contrapositive: if an organism can’t experience pain, it can’t be mistreated. And we can infer from the premises that plants can’t experience pain. So (D) guarantees the argument’s conclusion: plants can’t be mistreated.

The premises state that plants don’t have a nervous system, so plants fail the sufficient condition here. This assumption doesn’t get us anywhere.

PrepTest 102 - Section 4 - Question 18

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action