Logical reasoning PrepTest 117 · Section 3 · Question 11

Incorrect. The stimulus does establish that many presidents and prime ministers don't have foreign policy experience, but it doesn't then compare the overall experience levels between this group and the scholar/diplomat group. This is an unwarranted comparison.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True

Stimulus Summary:
(1) There are presidents/PMs with no foreign policy experience but successful foreign policies
(2) Acute political sense AND Disciplined temperament AND Absorb/retain info → Quickly learn how to have successful foreign policy
(3) Experience won't help someone without these three traits

Answer Anticipation:
Inferences are made when multiple statements discuss the same concepts—that overlap ties the statements together, and the different concepts can then be linked.

Here, there are three statements. The second is a conditional that can be applied to any case—someone with those three traits can quickly learn how to have a successful foreing policy. There are definitely potential answer choices there that establish someone has those three traits, concluding that they can learn foreign policy.

The first and last statements aren't conditional, and they don't bring up an example of someone with those three traits. The first statement talks about someone with a successful foreign policy, but that's not a sufficient condition of the conditional. So the conditional stands alone—we can't combine it or apply it to the other statements.

However, those statements do both discuss experience. The first one establishes that experience isn't necessary for a successful foreign policy—one can be successful despite lacking experience. And the last one establishes that experience isn't sufficient for a successful foreign policy, as someone who has experience but lacks certain qualities might not have a successful foreign policy. So the first and last statements, taken together, establish that experience is neither sufficient nor necessary for a successful foreign policy. This is likely the correct answer since it draws an inference from multiple statements.

Answer Explanation:
The first statement brings up examples of people who are successful in foreign policy despite no experience, showing experience isn't necessary. The last statement says that experience won't guarantee success for people who lack certain traits, establishing experience isn't sufficient. This answer is therefore supported by the first and last statements, so it's the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Look for statements that have shared concepts—they'll let you draw inferences by combining those statements. Must Be True questions that have inferences derived by combining multiple statements tend to have that inference as the correct answer.

Incorrect. The first line establishes examples of people who were successful in foreign policy without experience, so it can't be a necessary condition for such success.

Incorrect. The second line establishes those as sufficient conditions for someone learning to have a successful foreign policy. The last line does establish that someone who lacks all of these traits won't be helped by experience, but that's more or less saying that the set is necessary for a successful foreign policy, not that "each" is necessary for it.

Incorrect. Experience isn't noted as being sufficient or necessary for a successful foreign policy, and the argument raises the example of the many heads of state who had a successful foreign policy without experience. As such, this comparison is unsupported by the stimulus.