PT131.S2.Q6 > 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

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 Question 8

PASSAGE 2

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 Question 22

PASSAGE 4

Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

The author concludes that Jaaks’ negative review of Yancey’s new book is mistaken. He supports this by saying that Jaaks claims the book misrepresents fishery workers, but Yancey used the same research methods in this book as in her other books. He also notes that Yancey’s new book and her previous books are all very popular.

The author makes two key assumptions in his argument.

(1) He assumes that since Yancey used the same research methods in this book as in her previous books, she must not be misrepresenting fishery workers. He ignores the possibility that Yancey might just use bad research methods in all her books.

(2) He also assumes that because Yancey’s books are popular, they’re also factually accurate. However, a book’s popularity is not necessarily a reflection of its accuracy.

The author’s argument doesn't rely on the word of a scholar at all. He’s arguing against Jaaks, who is a scholar, but he doesn’t rely on any other scholar to support his argument.

This is the cookie-cutter “ad hominem” flaw, where an author attacks the source of an argument rather than the argument itself. The author doesn't make this mistake. He attacks Jaaks’ argument, not Jaaks herself.

The author assumes that because Yancey’s books are all popular, her books and research methods must be accurate. But a book’s popularity does not necessarily reflect its factual accuracy.

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of hasty generalization. The author doesn't make this mistake. He draws a specific conclusion about Jaak’s review.

The author assumes that Yancey’s methods produce accurate results, but he never assumes that hers are the only methods that would produce accurate results.

PrepTest 131 - Section 2 - Question 6

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action