Logical reasoning PrepTest 111 · Section 4 · Question 25

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Facts

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/NA

Question Type:
Methods of Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Z: It was common for later painters to add to a fresco, so all but the original paint must be removed from the Sistine Chapel to see Michelangelo's original intent.

S: It was very common for painters to add details to their own work.

Answer Anticipation:
The question stem asks us how Stephen responds to Zachary's argument. While Stephen doesn't specifically state a conclusion, the "But" at the beginning implies that he's rebutting something from Zachary's argument, and since it immediately follows Zachary's conclusion, Stephen is disagreeing with that.

How does Stephen suggest that stripping everything but Michelangelo's original paint from the Sistine Chapel wouldn't show Michelangelo's original intent? By bringing up a fact/possibility not considered by Zachary—that Michelangelo himself may have added details after the initial work was done. The correct answer should highlight this method of rebuttal.

It's important to note, as well, that Stephen doesn't disagree with Zachary's premise. Zachary brings up that other painters frequently added to the work of other painters. Stephen doesn't disagree with this, nor does he state that this didn't happen in the case of the Sistine Chapel. He just brings up that some additions may have been done by Michelangelo. This could be important in avoiding a trap answer.

Answer Explanation:
This answer isn't phrased the same way as our anticipation, but it does reflect the same logic. We stated that Stephen brought up a possibility that Zachary didn't consider—that's another way of saying it brings up a possibility that Zachary assumes didn't happen. That assumption is that Michelangelo didn't add anything to the Sistine Chapel after the original fresco work. This answer is thus correct.

Key Takeaway:
When a second speaker rebuts the first, there are a few ways that they'll commonly rebut the first argument. They could disagree with a premise, add additional information, or call the logic of the opposing point into question. Knowing which of these the rebuttal does—and which it doesn't—is key in answering structure questions based on these stimuluses.

Incorrect. "Fresco" is the key term that would be questioned, but there's no indication that Stephen thinks Zachary defined it incorrectly.

Incorrect. Stephen doesn't state a conclusion—he just brings up a consideration that Zachary ignores. Stephen could agree with Zachary for other reasons.

Incorrect. This is the trap answer we anticipated. Zachary's only premise is that the Sistine Chapel had additions made by painters other than Michelangelo. Stephen doesn't say that this isn't true; he just brings up the possibility that Michelangelo also may have made some alterations.

Incorrect. There's no contradiction pointed out in Zachary's argument, just a consideration that he didn't raise. Pointing out an inconsistency would require showing that Zachary's premises support the opposite conclusion to the one drawn.