PT109.S4.Q11 > 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

Only humans are capable of philosophical thought. Why? Because the only other creatures capable of human language are apes, but they don’t ask philosophical questions in human language. (So only humans ask philosophical questions in human language.)

The author concludes that only humans as are capable philosophical thought on the basis that only humans can ask philosophical questions in human language. But what does human language have to do with philosophical thought? The author must assume that philosophical thought requires you to ask philosophical questions in human language.

This contradicts the premises, which explicitly state that human language is not unique to humans. Apes can also learn human language. So the author can’t possibly assume (A).

It doesn’t matter whether apes are capable of thinking in human language, because either way, we know they don’t use it to ask philosophical questions. It’s this lack of philosophical questioning that matters to the argument, not the general ability to think in human language.

If we don’t assume (C)—if philosophical thought is possible without expressing it through human language—then it doesn’t matter that only humans can express philosophical thought through human language. Other creatures could have philosophical thought without human language. Without (C), the conclusion is entirely unsupported.

The difficulty of any task is irrelevant. The argument is all about what any given creature is capable of. So it doesn’t matter how easy or hard it is to think or speak in human language—the only question is whether a creature can do it or not.

The difficulty of any task is irrelevant. The argument is all about what any given creature is capable of. So it doesn’t matter how easy or hard it is to learn human language or express something in it—the only question is whether a creature can do it or not.

PrepTest 109 - Section 4 - Question 11

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action