PT115.S2.Q21 > 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

The author concludes that some people who are good at abstract reasoning are famous.

This is based on the following premises:

Most skilled artists are very creative.

All people who are very creative are also good at abstract reasoning.

(The part about “not all” skilled artists being famous isn’t being used as a premise, because it doesn’t help prove a claim about some people being famous.)

We know from connecting the two premises that most skilled artists are good at abstract reasoning. How can we get from this to the conclusion that some people good at abstract reasoning are famous?

Notice that “famous” is a new concept in the conclusion. We want to add something that will guarantee at least some of the skilled artists who are good at abstract reasoning are famous. For example:

Most skilled artists are famous.

Everyone who is very creative is famous.

(A) doesn’t tell us anything about who is famous. Since we don’t have any premise that establishes who is famous, an answer that doesn’t tell us who is famous cannot make the argument valid.

(B) doesn’t tell us anything about who is famous. Since we don’t have any premise that establishes who is famous, an answer that doesn’t tell us who is famous cannot make the argument valid.

Learning that some skilled artists are NOT famous doesn’t help me prove who IS famous.

(D) doesn’t tell us anything about who is famous. Since we don’t have any premise that establishes who is famous, an answer that doesn’t tell us who is famous cannot make the argument valid.

If most skilled artists are famous, and we know from the premises that most skilled artists are good at abstract reasoning, that establishes some people who are good at abstract reasoning are famous.

PrepTest 115 - Section 2 - Question 21

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action