PT128.S3.Q8 > 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 Question 13

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 Question 15 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 Question 28

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

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6

PASSAGE 2

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

The politician concludes that a democratic society should not control its citizens’ personal appearance. This is supported by the claims that personal appearance is a way for citizens to express themselves and potentially make political statements. This makes appearance similar to the free verbal expression upon which democratic societies rely.

The politician describes an accepted attitude toward one case and draws an analogy to another case with comparable features to reason that a similar attitude should apply to the latter case. By presenting personal appearance as analogous to free speech because both allow expression, the politician argues that democratic societies should not control personal appearance, just as they should not control speech.

The politician does not discuss the implications of the opposite conclusion to the one reached in the argument. The argument is presented directly, without discussing counter-arguments.

The politician does not reach a general conclusion at all, only a conclusion about the specific case of personal appearance in a democracy. Also, there’s no empirical thesis here which could lack counterexamples.

The politician does not claim that the conclusion drawn in the argument is widely accepted. The only widely accepted attitude which the politician cites is about an analogous case used to support the conclusion.

The politician concludes that personal appearance should be free in a democratic society based on evidence that personal appearance is a form of self-expression, and self-expression is commonly thought to support the analogous case of verbal free speech.

The politician doesn’t make a conclusion about what democratic societies actually do, only about what they should do.

PrepTest 128 - Section 3 - Question 8

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action