PT157.S3.Q13 > Analytics

SECTION 1 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

PASSAGE 2

Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12

PASSAGE 3

Question 13 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 2 · 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 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

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 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 political theorist concludes that if most people take a reasoned approach to getting what they want, then the power of the government should be less. She supports this by stating that the purpose of government is to prevent people from hurting others in the pursuit of their own goals.

The key assumption is that a reasoned approach will be less harmful to others. The stimulus doesn’t provide any information about what a reasoned approach actually involves. We don’t know whether a reasoned approach means people will do fewer things that injure others.

An additional assumption is that if fewer people are being injured, the government should be less powerful. Even if most people are taking a reasoned approach, maybe the government needs to remain equally powerful to deal with the few people who don’t.

Let’s negate this. If governments are able to make people take a reasoned approach, it doesn’t change the author’s argument that a reasoned approach means less of a role for the government, because fewer people are inuring others.

Even if the government had to diminish people’s ability to promote their own welfare to serve its purpose, the conclusion could still be true. The argument is about preventing people from hurting others — not what happens to the people who it prevents from injuring others.

This is necessary to conclude that if people take a reasoned approach, the government should have less power. If people who take a reasoned approach are equally likely to injure people, then the government still needs to serve its role of preventing people from injuring others.

It only matters for the argument whether people will injure others — not what eventually happens to them.

What we want to know is that people with a reasoned approach injure other people less. We’re concerned with preventing people from injuring others — it doesn’t matter who specifically is more likely to be injured.

Question

89% of people who answer get this correct

This is a low-difficulty question.

CURVE

Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right

25% 122

132

75% 143

Question Stem Tags

Necessary assumption

Popularity Avg. score

147

146

89%

158

145

You don't have any history with this question.. yet!

PrepTest 157 - Section 3 - Question 13

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action