PT107.S4.Q16 > 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 · 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 Question 14 Question 15

PASSAGE 3

Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21

PASSAGE 4

Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

Franklin argues that it’s “inconsistent” to pay top athletes ten times more than Nobel prize winners. As support, Franklin points to similarities between the two: both have rare talents, and both must work hard.

Tomeka’s argument is designed to support the (implied) conclusion that the athlete/Nobel laureate pay gap is not inconsistent. Tomeka supports this with a difference between the two: sports celebrities bring their employers tons of money from ticket sales and TV rights, whereas Nobel laureates do not.

We need to find a statement whose truth Franklin and Tomeka would disagree about. The main point of disagreement between the speakers is whether the pay gap between sports celebrities and Nobel laureates is truly inconsistent, as Franklin claims, or warranted by the circumstances, as Tomeka implies.

Neither speaker says anything about how seriously people take Nobel laureates, let alone whether we should take them more seriously.

Tomeka would likely disagree with this claim, but Franklin never expresses an opinion. At most, Franklin’s argument seems designed to support equal pay, so we cannot say that either speaker would agree with this claim.

Neither speaker actually expresses an opinion about this. Franklin comes close with the claim that both sports celebrities and Nobel laureates work hard, but there’s still no outright comparison of how hard they work.

Franklin agrees with this, but Tomeka is implied to disagree, making this the point of disagreement. Franklin’s conclusion is that the pay gap is “inconsistent,” meaning that it doesn’t make sense. Tomeka, however, points out a difference that would explain a pay gap.

Neither speaker brings up social contributions at all. The issue is whether it makes sense that sports celebrities are paid much more than Nobel laureates; social contributions are totally outside the scope of the argument.

PrepTest 107 - Section 4 - Question 16

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action