PT115.S2.Q1 > Question

SECTION 1 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

PASSAGE 2

Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12

PASSAGE 3

Question 13 Question 14 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 Question 27 Question 28

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

SECTION 3 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8

PASSAGE 2

Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16

PASSAGE 3

Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23

PASSAGE 4

Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27 Question 28

SECTION 4 · lr

Judges should be able to determine whether an administrative decision made by a government minister is reasonable. Upton defends this using conditional logic: If judges can’t determine this, then there’s something wrong with the legal system. By negating the necessary condition (likely nothing wrong with the legal system), the sufficient is also negated: Judges can determine this.

The conclusion is a confirmation of judge ability: “Whether some administrative decision by a government minister is reasonable ‘is a question that judges, by their training and experience, should be well-equipped to answer.’”

This is premise. (A) negates the necessary condition (if judges can’t determine this, then there’s something wrong with the legal system) so that the sufficient can also be negated: judges can determine this.

Upton doesn’t address whether the power of judges should expand. Upton only addresses whether judges have the ability to make a certain kind of determination.

This is the main conclusion. Upton eliminates the requirement for judges to be incapable of this decision (legal system issue), therefore, they are capable.

This confuses sufficient and necessary conditions of a premise. A legal system issue is a requirement of judge inability; it doesn’t guarantee it.

This is mistranslation of a premise. Upton says that if judges can’t make the determination, then there’s something wrong. We can’t assume that if judges can make the determination, there’s nothing wrong. We can only confirm the sufficient to then confirm necessary, or negate the necessary to then negate sufficient.

PrepTest 115 - Section 2 - Question 1

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action