PT148.S4.Q16 > 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 · 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

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

The author concludes that Juan must have entered the logo-generation contest. The author supports this conclusion with the following:

One of the rules stated that everyone who entered the contest would receive a T-shirt with the company’s logo.

Juan has a T-shirt with the company’s logo.

The author confuses a sufficient condition with a necessary condition. Entrance into the contest is sufficient to get the T-shirt. But that doesn’t mean it’s necessary. Maybe some people could have gotten the T-shirt without entering the contest.

The argument doesn’t conclude or assume a causal relationship. The argument’s based on application of a conditional rule.

The contest rules tell us that entrance into the contest is sufficient for the outcome of getting a T-shirt with the logo. But that doesn’t imply entrance into the contest is necessary for the T-shirt. So the fact Juan has the T-shirt doesn’t prove that he entered the contest.

The argument doesn’t commit a whole-to-part fallacy. The evidence concerns a rule of the contest and Juan. The conclusion is based on an attempt to apply that rule to Juan. The author doesn’t conclude or assume anything about every member of a group.

(D) describes circular reasoning. The author’s conclusion — that Juan entered the contest — is not restated in the premises.

The argument doesn’t generalize based on a single instance. The argument tries to apply a conditional rule to Juan. The argument doesn’t conclude or assume anything about a broader group.

PrepTest 148 - Section 4 - Question 16

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action