PT117.S4.Q4 > 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 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 Question 27

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

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

The argument concludes that we should be cautious about radical solutions to problems which are proposed as a reaction to new statistical data. This is because, when stats show a sudden increase in a problem, it’s often just because we’re more aware of the problem or more able to track it.

The argument assumes that greater awareness of a problem, or greater ability to track that problem, do not by themselves justify radical solutions to the problem. Otherwise, there would be no link between a proposed radical solution being prompted by statistical data, and a need for caution.

The argument tells us to be cautious when being more aware of a problem—in other words, heightened cognizance—leads to a proposed radical solution. That conforms to this principle, that greater awareness doesn’t actually justify radical solutions.

The argument isn’t specifically talking about attempts to stop a problem from occurring, but about “radical solutions” in general. Also, the argument for caution is much broader than just ensuring the problem exists. This principle is too narrow to match the argument.

The argument isn’t concerned with what information the radical solutions are based on. The issue is what justifies proposing radical solutions in the first place, which this doesn’t address.

The idea of manipulating statistical data doesn’t come up anywhere in the argument, and is irrelevant to the argument’s reasoning.

This is irrelevant, because the argument isn’t concerned with weighing the costs and benefits of radical solutions overall.

PrepTest 117 - Section 4 - Question 4

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action