PT120.S4.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

The banker concludes that people are wrong to criticize some governments’ recent anti-capitalistic measures. His reasoning is that, when a totalitarian government democratizes, it must take certain anti-capitalistic measures.

The banker’s support is about countries that transition from totalitarian governments to democratic ones. But what if the governments in his conclusion aren’t undergoing such a transition? His argument wouldn’t provide any justification for anti-capitalistic measures in that case.

Therefore, the banker must assume that the nations were formerly totalitarian, and are now becoming democratic.

The banker has no need to assume this: if a current government had reached a complete state of democracy, it would not contradict any part of his argument.

The banker is saying that you need a threshold level of deregulation to be a democracy, not that more deregulation always leads to more democracy.

It’s like a Web site requiring a password of 8+ characters to create an account. A 20-character password doesn’t get more access.

This is irrelevant: the banker never indicates that economic stability is important to either democracy or free-market economies.

The banker argues that democracy requires a free-market economy, not that a free-market economy requires a democracy. It’s like he claimed that all oranges are fruits; that doesn’t mean he’s assuming that all fruits are oranges.

The only circumstances in which the banker has justified anticapitalistic measures are transitions away from totalitarian governments. If these nations were not making such a change, his argument gives no reason not to condemn these measures.

PrepTest 120 - Section 4 - Question 20

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action