PT112.S3.Q12 > 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 · rc

PASSAGE 1

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

PASSAGE 2

Question 7 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

PASSAGE 4

Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

If laws are vague, people cannot feel secure. This is because it’s impossible for them to know for certain whether their actions are legal.

The support is about lack of knowledge, but the conclusion concerns lack of security. We need to connect the two. Consequently, to guarantee the conclusion, the author must assume that, if people don’t know whether their actions are legal, they can’t feel secure. (Contrapositive: if people feel secure, they must know if their actions are legal.)

The contrapositive is: if people don’t know whether their actions are legal, they can’t feel secure. Vague laws mean that people don’t know if their actions are legal. So (A) guarantees the conclusion that vague laws lead to people not feeling secure.

The argument’s conclusion is absolute; by contrast, (B) adds the qualification “might” and is thus limited.

This is the negation of what we want. (C) starts with people knowing their actions are legal, and ends with people feeling secure. To bridge the gap in the argument, we want to start with people not knowing if their actions are legal. And end with people feeling insecure.

This can’t be correct, because it tells us about the case where people are governed by laws that are not vague. The stimulus is about the case where laws are vague.

This means: if you know your actions are legal, then you’ll feel secure. This is the negation of what we want. To bridge the gap in the argument, we want to start with people not knowing if their actions are legal. And end with people feeling insecure.

PrepTest 112 - Section 3 - Question 12

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action