Logical reasoning PrepTest 109 · Section 1 · Question 3

Question prompt

Juan: Unlike the ancient Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: A

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

Question Type

Point at Issue Questions

Answer choices

  1. A
    whether the participation of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem
    Correct. Argument or Facts:
    Argument/Argument

    Valid or Flawed:
    Flawed/Valid

    Question Type:
    Point at Issue

    Stimulus Summary:
    J: Ancient Olympics — Just amateurs. Modern Olympics — Amateurs and pros. Amateurs don't have the resources of the pros and thus can't really compete, so allowing the pros in doesn't line up with the Olympic's goal of fairness.

    M: The goal of the Modern Olympics is to highlight the best athletes, so pros should be allowed in.

    Answer Anticipation:
    Michiko and Juan here have "dueling" conclusions—Juan believes that professionals shouldn't be let into the Olympics (or at least it violates the spirit of fairness of the games). Michiko believes that they should be as letting them in aligns with the goal of the modern Olympics—to highlight the best athletes.

    This encapsulates both things you should anticipate when faced with a Point at Issue question that features opposed conclusions—the conclusion itself but also what difference there is between the two that leads them to different conclusions. Here they disagree over the goals of the modern games (fairness vs. highlight the best athletes) and thus reach a different conclusion on the inclusion of pro athletes.

    Answer Explanation:
    This answer encapsulates the point at issue between them. They disagree over the ideals of the modern Olympics (fairness vs. best athletes) and thus whether pros should be included.

    Key Takeaway:
    When two speakers in a Point at Issue question have opposed conclusions make sure to figure out what the difference is in their reasoning or premises that leads them to different conclusions. While many correct answers will reflect the conclusions just as many will highlight the difference in their arguments that led to those different conclusions.
  2. B
    whether both amateur and Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Incorrect. Michiko doesn't discuss the ancient games, so this answer is out of scope of her statement.
  3. C
    whether the athletes who Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Incorrect. Juan doesn't discuss the quality of the athletes in the games, so this answer is out of scope.
  4. D
    whether any amateur athletes Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Incorrect. Michiko doesn't discuss the resources available to these different categories of athlete—in fact, she says that the goals of the modern games are "regardless" of their resources. Even Juan says only that amateurs "rarely" have the resources of pros suggesting that he believes some do.
  5. E
    whether governments sponsor professional Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Incorrect. Government sponsorship is out of scope, as neither speaker mentions it.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A Credited 93%
  2. B 2%
  3. C 2%
  4. D 2%
  5. E 0%

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

  • Why? 1 reply

    Started by Katie10