PT140.S3.Q1 > 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

PASSAGE 2

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

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

The ad concludes that it costs more to bank at TekBank than at GreenBank. It supports this by noting that ATM transactions cost more at TekBank than at GreenBank.

This is the part to whole flaw, where the argument assumes that something true about one part of a whole must be true about the entire whole.

Here, the ad assumes that banking at TekBank costs more just because ATM use at TekBank costs more. However, other factors, like getting a loan or opening an account, might actually make TekBank cheaper than GreenBank.

The ad actually never makes a recommendation about which bank someone should use. It just concludes that one bank is more expensive than the other.

The cost of ATM use at each bank is relevant to the conclusion about which bank is more expensive. It’s just not sufficient evidence to conclude that TekBank is more expensive.

The ad concludes that the overall cost of banking with TekBank is higher based solely on the claim that the cost of ATM use with TekBank is higher. But there might be other factors and fees that make GreenBank more expensive overall.

This is the opposite of the ad’s flaw. Instead of (D), the ad concludes that the service as a whole must have a property that one component of the service possesses.

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of assuming that a conclusion is false simply because its support is weak. The ad doesn’t make this mistake. In fact, it’s not concluding that any claim is false in the first place.

PrepTest 140 - Section 3 - Question 1

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action