Logical reasoning PrepTest 106 · Section 1 · Question 18

Flawed

Must Be True Questions

How science is conducted can change, but it should be balanced with the cost. (Three examples.) The examples show massive changes that would cost a lot!

Triple pivot! There are a lot of shifts in this stimulus, so let’s walk through it, going through our internal narrative as we consider the argument.

It starts by stating that something is possible - science can be changed. That could be a conclusion, but the argument then immediately pivots away - those changes need to be warranted based on the cost. This has three elements that make it seem like a conclusion. First, it’s an opinion on the opening line. Second, it makes a recommendation - we need to do something - and recommendations tend to be conclusions. Third, it talks about a cost/benefit analysis, and those tend to show up in conclusions.

After this statement, the argument goes into an example of something about scientific research that could be changed (animal testing). And then another example (recombinant DNA)... and another (fraud police, among others). In the last pivot, it then says that these changes would each be costly and change the character of science.

The pivot here also has elements of a conclusion - it generalizes from several examples, and it is an opinion on certain changes. So we should see if this statement supports the second one, or vice versa.

Looking at both of them, the examples being costly while changing the character of science supports the view that the costs and benefits need to be balanced before a change should be considered. As such, the final statement is an intermediate conclusion, with the main point being that second statement. Let’s find an answer stating that changes to the way science is conducted must be weighed against their cost.