Logical reasoning PrepTest 116 · Section 2 · Question 2

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Argument Structure

Stimulus Summary:
Hypothesis — The Earth is a living organism
Support — The Earth is similar to a living organism in many ways
Potential objection — The Earth doesn't literally breathe
Counter to objection — Neither do insects

Answer Anticipation:
The Essayist nicely lays out the hypothesis she intends to support explicitly—Earth is a living organism. That's the conclusion that's being supported by the rest of the argument, so we should define the statement in question as to how it plays into an argument building to this hypothesis.

She supports the hypothesis by comparing the Earth to other living organisms in the many things that they do. However, she does concede that there's a potential difference—something that living organisms are commonly believed to do but the Earth doesn't. This objection—that the Earth doesn't literally breathe—is addressed through an example of what people would consider a living organism that also doesn't literally breathe—insects.

The statement in question is that example, so the answer should reflect that it's meant to rebut a potential objection and thus support the hypothesis.

Answer Explanation:
This answer correctly describes the role of the statement in question. Some might question the hypothesis that the Earth is a living organism based on what they view as a difference between Earth and living things—the Earth doesn't literally breathe. Insects are brought up to show that not breathing isn't sufficient to rule something out as a living organism.

Key Takeaway:
The conclusion defines an argument, and the role of statements are defined with respect to how they play into supporting that conclusion.

Incorrect. The argument is set up to support the view that Earth is a living organism, so it's incorrect to describe that as a false belief as this answer choice does.

Incorrect. Breathing and having a metabolism are set out as different considerations in the stimulus (along with regulating certain aspects of the body).

Incorrect. The argument treats insects as an example of an organism that would be viewed as living, not as an organism whose status is unclear. It's brought up to show that living organisms don't need to literally breathe.

Incorrect. While insects are, presumably, an example of living organisms that compose the Earth, the Essayist doesn't bring insects up as an example of that. That statement is made in the first line, and the insects aren't brought up until the end, in response to a potential challenge to the hypothesis with respect to breathing.