PT154.S4.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 Question 26

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · 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 Question 20

PASSAGE 4

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

SECTION 4 · lr

The author concludes that the dangers of mountain climbing have been greatly exaggerated. This is based on the fact that between 1922 and 2002, there have been fewer than 200 climbing deaths on Mt. Everest. But there were over 7,000 traffic deaths in France alone in 2002.

The author fails to consider the number of people who climbed Mt. Everest between 1922 and 2002 and the number of people who drove in France in 2002. This is relevant to the overall fatality rate. For example, maybe there were only 200 people who climbed Mt. Everest during that time, and almost every one of them died. This would tend to show that climbing Mt. Everest was extremely dangerous.

The author cited the numbers in France simply to show the large disparity in deaths from driving and from climbing. If in 2001, there were, for example, 6,900 traffic deaths, that has no impact. Or if 2000 involved 5,000 deaths, that’s still far more than 200 climbing deaths.

The author cited the numbers in France simply to show the large disparity in deaths from driving and climbing. If France usually has a higher number of traffic deaths than other countries, that changes nothing, because the disparity in fatalities from driving and climbing would still be large.

The author doesn’t assume that we can’t make things safer. The argument is about the current danger presented by climbing, not whether climbing can be made safer.

The author fails to consider that there might have been very few climers on Mount Everest, and many thousands of driver on French roads. This is relevant to the overall fatality rate, which is a more accurate measure of danger than simply counting the number of deaths.

The number of deaths on other mountains doesn’t tell us anything about the death rate on Mount Everest. What’s missing from this argument is information that bears upon the relative death rate on Mount Everest vs. driving in France in 2002.

PrepTest 154 - Section 4 - Question 10

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action