PT125.S2.Q9 > 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

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 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 Question 26

SECTION 3 · 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 Question 15

PASSAGE 3

Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20

PASSAGE 4

Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 4 · lr

The increase in minimum wage will negatively impact museum-goers, because it will increase museum expenses and that will come out of museum-goers’ pockets.

The museum visitor has jumped from a mandate with specific rules to an expected outcome about museums, but we don’t know that museums will qualify for the mandate. If the mandate affects museum workers and raises their minimum wage, the museum visitor’s argument stands a chance. But we don’t know that it actually will affect museum workers.

This must be true. You would negate “some,” and that leads to:

“None of the museum’s employees are not paid significantly more than the minimum wage.”

There’s your negation, but for simplicity’s sake, take advantage of the double negative. “None are not” is the same as “All are.” So, the simpler negation of (A) is:

“All of the museum’s employees are paid significantly more than the minimum wage.”

This negation wrecks the argument; if all of them are already paid more than minimum wage, then this mandate won’t affect museums.

It doesn’t matter how stable or unstable this factor is—it has no effect on the argument either way. The argument is concerned with how it will change in the future.

The negation of (C) would strengthen the argument, rather than ruin it: “None of the museum’s employees...” If this is true, then we have more reason to believe that the mandate will affect museum employees.

Not necessary for the conclusion. Whether this has increased, decreased or stayed constant, it doesn’t affect the argument.

The negation of (E) doesn’t ruin this argument: “All visitors to the museum are required...” Museum operating expenses could still be higher than revenue, and museums could still turn to admission fees and decreased services to solve the problem.

PrepTest 125 - Section 2 - Question 9

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action