Logical reasoning PrepTest 114 · Section 1 · Question 12

Incorrect. The argument is about the current situation, where technological change does require retraining. It doesn't require anything to be true about another time.

Incorrect. What will happen in a world where the pace of technological change slows is out of scope—that's not the world the Economist is talking about!

Incorrect. First, this answer is about technological workers, whereas the argument is about all workers, so there's a mismatch there. Second, the argument is about programs that are efficient, not the "most" efficient.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Necessary Premise

Stimulus Summary:
Background - Advances in technology mean workers need retraining
Efficient retraining → Allows companies to meet short-term needs
Therefore - Large governmental retraining program: not Efficient retraining

Answer Anticipation:
This Strengthen with Necessary Premise question presents a conditional premise, and then it tries to apply it to a specific case in the conclusion. However, the conclusion and the conditional have the shared term on opposite sides, so let's start by taking the contrapositive of the premise:
not Allows companies to meet short-term needs → not Efficient retraining

Frequently, when a Strengthen with Necessary Premise question works by applying a conditional to a specific case, it'll fail to establish that the specific case meets the sufficient condition. Here, that sufficient condition is a program that doesn't allow companies to meet their short-term needs. The only information we learn about the programs in the conclusion, however, is that they are large governmental programs. That doesn't establish that the sufficient condition is met!

The correct answer, then, should establish that large governmental job retraining programs don't allow individual companies to meet their short-term needs.

Answer Explanation:
This answer establishes that the type of training program mentioned in the conclusion meets the sufficient condition of the conditional premise, guaranteeing that those programs aren't efficient. If these large governmental programs do meet the short-term needs of different companies, then the conditional doesn't apply in their case and the argument falls apart.

Key Takeaway:
When a Strengthen with Necessary Premise question works by applying a conditional to a specific case, check to see if the argument establishes that the case meets the sufficient condition. Frequently, it won't, and the correct answer will establish that it does.

Incorrect. Moving for work is out of scope of the argument.