PT106.S1.Q19 > 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 that there are no universal truths and the world is full of irregular events. She supports this by saying that the postmodern view rejects ideas of order and universal truth, emphasizing instead a belief in chaos and irregularity.

This is the cookie-cutter “fact vs. belief” flaw, where the author incorrectly assumes that because a large group of people believe something to be true, it must be a factual reality. In short, she essentially claims, “Postmodernists believe X. Therefore, X is true.”

On top of this, the author subtly contradicts herself. By claiming that there are no universal truths, the author attempts to make a universally true claim.

The author infers that the postmodern view is factually the case, simply because it is believed to be the case. But other people’s belief in the view is not evidence that it is actually correct or true.

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of “equivocation,” where the author uses one term to mean multiple different things. But the other uses “universal” consistently, and (B) doesn’t describe the flaw in her argument.

The author mistakes belief for fact, but she isn’t relying on emotional terms to strengthen her conclusion or manipulate her audience.

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of “equivocation,” where the author uses one term to mean multiple different things. But the other uses “order” consistently, and (D) doesn’t describe the flaw in her argument.

It’s true that the author doesn’t provide examples of modern theories, but this doesn’t weaken her argument, so it can’t be the flaw. Her conclusion is about the postmodern view; she only refers to the modern view contextually.

PrepTest 106 - Section 1 - Question 19

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action