PT109.S1.Q5 > 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

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22

PASSAGE 4

Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27 Question 28

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

The author argues that plastic use in a certain nation is actually less harmful to the environment than the use of paper products. This is supported by the claim that a given amount of trash does about the same amount of harm, whether plastic or paper. Additionally, a recent study found that the nation produces more paper trash than plastic trash.

The conclusion that the argument supports is the author’s statement that “the current use of plastics actually does less harm to the environment nationwide than that of paper products.”

This statement is used in the argument to support the claim that paper trash is currently more harmful than plastic trash, and is not supported by anything else. That makes this a premise.

The author never discusses the ratio of weight to volume for any kind of trash. All we know is that plastic trash has a smaller weight and volume than paper trash, not the ratios.

The author’s mention of popular opinion just adds context and flavor to the argument. Nothing in the argument is meant to support a claim about popular opinion, so this can’t be the main conclusion.

The author never makes any claims about how potential changes in product use would impact the environment. The argument is purely about what’s going on right now.

This accurately restates the conclusion. The rest of the argument supports the author’s statement that plastic trash is currently less harmful than paper trash; or in other words, that paper trash is more harmful right now.

PrepTest 109 - Section 1 - Question 5

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action