PT120.S3.Q20 > 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

PASSAGE 2

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

PASSAGE 3

Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18

PASSAGE 4

Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

OPA: Some argue that certain actions are morally obligatory because not acting in that way would be unnatural.

Conclusion: But that’s absurd, i.e., the argument’s logic is absurd.

Premise: An “unnatural action” is either a violation of the laws of nature or a statistical anomaly. Violating the laws of nature is impossible. A statistical anomaly is simply something uncommon, and that is not a good reason to avoid doing it.

Author shows that a key concept (”unnatural”) in OP’s premise can only mean two things, neither of which supports OP’s conclusion. Hence, OP’s conclusion is unsupported.

Descriptively inaccurate. The only concept the author can arguably be said to be undermining is the concept of “unnatural.” Yet the author does not show that accepting the concept of “unnatural” would violate a law of nature. Instead, the author shows that “unnatural” can only have two meanings, neither of which supports the OP’s conclusion.

Descriptively accurate. Author states the definition of “unnatural.”

Descriptively inaccurate. There is a difference between defining a concept as a “statistical anomaly” (which the author does) versus using a statistical finding (which the author does not do). A statistical finding would be, e.g., car accidents decreased 10% last year.

Descriptively inaccurate. There is a difference between stating that some “unnatural” actions are impossible to perform because they violate the laws of nature (which the author does) versus showing that the concept of “unnatural” is self-contradictory (which the author does not do).

Descriptively inaccurate. Author does not use empirical evidence—evidence gathered by observation or experimentation—to support anything. Example of empirical evidence could be a statistical finding that, say, car accidents decreased 10% last year.

PrepTest 120 - Section 3 - Question 20

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action