Logical reasoning PrepTest 102 · Section 2 · Question 7

Incorrect. The argument states only that it's misleading to say the assassination was the cause of the war without further qualification. It notes that the assassination was a cause in a trivial sense, and that the deeper causes were already in effect. As such, it doesn't state that the assassination wasn't a cause, nor that all the other causes have equal claim to being the true cause.

Incorrect. The argument uses an analogy to claim that the war was inevitable "in the prevailing conditions," but that was to support the view that the assassination doesn't fully present the cause of the war.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Valid

Question Type:
Main Point

Stimulus Summary:
Traditional teaching - An assassination caused WWI

Opinion on that - It's misleading without more qualification
Why? Because there were deeper causes, plus here's an analogy

Answer Anticipation:
This argument starts with what students "have been taught" which establishes the "traditional" view on a given topic—the cause of WWI. Whenever an argument introduces a traditional view, expect the author to pivot away from it, and her opinion on it will almost always serve as the main point.

Here, that pivot/opinion ("however") happens right after—this view is "bound to mislead" without some further qualification. As the author's opinion of the opposing point, this is almost certainly the main point of the argument.

That it's the main point is reinforced by the rest of the argument. The "since" right after it shows that it's being supported by what follows. The argument goes on to present the reasons why that traditional view is misleading—there were deeper causes—before using an analogy to drive that point home.

As such, let's find an answer that reflects the author's opinion of the traditional view—that teaching a political assassination was the cause of WWI is misleading without further qualification.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights the way in which the traditional view is misleading—that it's technically true, but it hides the deeper causes which were the true reasons for WWI. As such, this answer reflects the main point of the argument by showing exactly how the traditional view is misleading—the author's opinion of the opposing point.

Key Takeaway:
When an argument features an opposing point, the author's opinion of that viewpoint is almost always the main point of the argument.

Incorrect. This answer is a counterfactual to what actually happened, and one that the argument never raises, so it can't serve as the main point of the argument. It is, at best, a potential implication of the author's argument.

Incorrect. Similar to (D), this answer presents a counterfactual that isn't stated in the stimulus, so it can't be the correct answer.