PT133.S3.Q10 > 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

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

Critics complain that advertising tricks people into confusing wants with needs, but this complaint relies on making the difficult distinction between wants and needs. In reality, it can be nearly impossible to determine whether something is merely a want or a genuine need.

Critics' complaints about advertising require making a distinction between wants and needs, which is almost impossible.

This is a good summary of the editorial’s argument. The editorial contends that the claim made by critics of consumerism—that advertising tricks people into confusing wants with needs—“rests on a fuzzy distinction” because wants and needs are almost impossible to distinguish.

This sentence provides context for the stimulus. It introduces the position that advertising causes confusion between wants and needs, setting the stage for the editorial’s counterargument that distinguishing between wants and needs is not as clear-cut as critics suggest.

The editorial does not make this argument because the editorial does not judge advertising itself. Instead, the editorial critiques the reasoning of consumerism’s critics, particularly the critics’ assumption that it is possible to distinguish between wants and needs clearly.

This is not a flaw in the critics’ reasoning that the editorial addresses. The editorial challenges the assumption that it is possible to clearly distinguish between wants and needs, not whether critics recognize the existence of needs or things “essential to human happiness.”

The stimulus only offers one example of critics using fuzzy distinctions, so we cannot conclude that critics “often” do this. Since the stimulus doesn’t fully support this claim, it cannot be the main conclusion.

PrepTest 133 - Section 3 - Question 10

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action