PT127.S2.Q11 > 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 · lr

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · 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 Question 21

PASSAGE 4

Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

Frank concludes that Lance is wrong to claim that “every general rule has at least one exception.” This is because, according to Lance’s claim, Lance’s own general rule would need to have an exception. In other words, if Lance’s claim is true then not every general rule has at least one exception, in which case Lance’s claim cannot be true.

Frank counters Lance’s claim by pointing out that it is self-contradictory and cannot be logically true. As Frank points out, Lance’s general rule that “every general rule has at least one exception” entails that this rule itself must have at least one exception. If Lance’s rule has an exception, then logically, there must be some general rule with no exception, which would make Lance’s rule false.

Frank doesn’t demonstrate that Lance assumes the point that he is trying to prove. Instead, Frank demonstrates that Lance’s point is self-contradictory and therefore invalid.

Frank shows that Lance’s conclusion is self-contradictory, because in following the chain of inferences from Lance’s rule, one must end up breaking that rule.

Frank doesn’t claim that no general rule can have exceptions, only that Lance’s assertion that every general rule must have an exception is invalid.

Frank doesn’t claim that the opposite of Lance’s conclusion is true, only that Lance’s conclusion is invalid. Frank also never talks about what experience teaches us.

Frank doesn’t bring up real cases in his argument. He only shows that Lance’s conclusion is logically contradictory.

PrepTest 127 - Section 2 - Question 11

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action