PT113.S4.Q21 > Question

SECTION 1 · 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

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

SECTION 2 · 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 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

We shouldn’t allow new laws to be repealed unless it’s an emergency. Why? Because immediate effects are likely to be negative and short-lived, but long-term benefits take time to manifest.

The argument’s premises explain why a law might be worse right after being passed than in the long run. Then the argument concludes that we should have these laws stay in effect for longer periods of time. It does not explain why we should prioritize long-term benefits over short-term pain.

We are looking for a principle that explains why we should wait to see the long-term effects of a law, rather than just immediately repeal it to avoid short-term negative consequences.

Wrong trigger. The argument isn’t about the importance of the voters’ opinions about a law - it’s about the short-term vs long-term effects of the law.

This explains why long-term effects of a law should be prioritized: the long-term benefits are what matter, so we should wait for them before repealing a law. The argument explains that we won’t know the long-term effects right after a law is passed, hence, period of immunity.

The argument isn’t concerned with how difficult the passage of a law is or should be. It’s focused only on repealing laws.

Wrong trigger. The argument isn’t focused on the consequences of a repeal (what will happen after a law is repealed); the argument is focused on what determines the ability to repeal a law.

Wrong trigger. This tells us about the criteria of a law being enacted, but the argument is focused on how we should decide to repeal a law that has already been enacted.

PrepTest 113 - Section 4 - Question 21

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action