Logical reasoning PrepTest 105 · Section 2 · Question 14

Question prompt

Yolanda: Gaining access to Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed/Flawed

Question Type

Errors in Reasoning Questions

Stimulus Summary

Y: Hacking is like joyriding, but joyriding puts people in physical danger while hacking doesn’t, so joyriding is more dangerous. A: Hacking can put people in physical danger, so I disagree that joyriding is a more dangerous crime.

Answer Anticipation

For this second question, we’re tasked with finding an error in Arjun’s reasoning. However, Arjun’s argument calls back to Yolanda’s in his opening statement, so we have to be sure to rephrase his conclusion so that we can analyze his argument. His conclusion? “I disagree.” As we just noted in the last question, in highlighting a means that hacking can lead to physical harm, Arjun is questioning the support for Yolanda’s conclusion and the conclusion itself. So we can rephrase his argument: Hacking could potentially cause physical harm, so joyriding isn’t necessarily the more dangerous crime. However, note the way we phrased that - hacking “could potentially” cause physical harm. The stimulus even shows how speculative Arjun’s argument is, using similar language (“could damage”). The intermediate conclusion, however, is certain - hacking “cause[s]” physical harm. Jumping from what could happen to what does happen is a leap in strength, so let’s find an answer reflecting that flaw.

Answer choices

  1. A
    fails to maintain a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    The main distinction in Yolanda’s argument is between crimes that physically endanger people, and those that harm only intellectual property. While Arjun disagrees with Yolanda on which crimes fall into which category, he does maintain that distinction by focusing on potential physical harm caused by hacking, due to the damage to intellectual property. This answer would be correct if he treated damage to intellectual property as a type of physical harm, not as a potential cause of physical harm.
  2. B
    denies Yolanda's conclusion without Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Arjun provides a hypothetical situation that calls one of Yolanda’s premises into question, so he does provide evidence against it (albeit speculative evidence).
  3. C
    relies on the actuality Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem
    Arjun uses a highly speculative hypothetical situation where hacking a hospital might lead to physical danger to support his claim that it does cause physical harm to people. That’s treating a situation he has shown is possible as if it actually happens, so this is the correct answer.
  4. D
    mistakes something that leads Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    This answer describes a Sufficient (“leads to”)/Necessary flaw, but conditional logic isn’t present in his argument. Also, his premise doesn’t lead to his conclusion (as we noted, it’s flawed), nor does he treat it as necessary to show that this one specific situation causes physical harm - others could work, as well.
  5. E
    uses as evidence a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    The phenomenon he brings up shows how hacking could lead to physical harm, so it’s not inconsistent with his conclusion - it just doesn’t fully justify it.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 24%
  2. B 7%
  3. C Credited 49%
  4. D 16%
  5. E 4%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion