PT125.S4.Q2 > 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

Terry concludes that Kris is “absurd” to claim that the cellular industry must be regulated the same way as the chemical industry because they both produce a form of pollution. Terry supports this position by claiming that chemical pollution is more harmful than the noise pollution produced by cell phones.

Terry counters Kris’s argument by rejecting Kris’s analogy. Kris claims that two industries should be similarly regulated by analogizing their harmful consequences, and Terry counters by claiming that the harms presented by Kris as analogous are very different in severity.

Terry doesn’t question the reliability of Kris’s information sources. All Terry questions is Kris’s use of an analogy.

Terry doesn’t claim that Kris is making any false claims about the chemical industry, only that the analogy Kris makes between the chemical and cellular industries is weak.

Terry doesn’t make any arguments against Kris based on wrong causality.

By denying that the harms of chemicals are comparable to the harms of cell phones, Terry questions the strength of the analogy that Kris uses to support the argument that chemicals and cell phones should be similarly regulated.

Terry does not reject Kris’s interpretation of the term “technological progress,” or even discuss it at all.

PrepTest 125 - Section 4 - Question 2

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action