Logical reasoning PrepTest 120 · Section 3 · Question 12

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Argument Completion

Stimulus Summary:
Critics: Freudianism says the unconscious can defeat rational planning, so it's not compatible with Western rationalism.

Freudian: Freudianism believes that you can understand your unconscious thoughts and overcome them. Therefore, __________.

Answer Anticipation:
When an argument rebuts an opposing point, the conclusion is frequently the author's opinion of that opposing point.

Here, the argument starts by introducing the beliefs of critics of Freudianism—they believe that a central tenet of it makes it incompatible with Western philosophy/psychological thought. The reason for this is that Freudianism believes the unconscious can defeat conscious planning.

The argument then pivots ("But") to showing how Freudianism has another belief that isn't taken into account by these critics. The philosophy also holds that you can become aware of these unconscious desires and "avoid" succumbing to them.

When an argument rebuts an opposing position, again, the conclusion is generally the opinion of that viewpoint—and there are two broad categories. The first is an opinion that the opposing point hasn't proven its point; the second is that the opposing point is wrong. In showing a way that an individual can consciously overcome these unconscious desires, the argument shows that Freudianism can be compatible with Western rationalism. As such, the argument here is building to a conclusion that the opposing point is wrong, and we should look for an answer stating that.

Answer Explanation:
The opposing point believes that Freudianism does run counter to Western rationalistic philosophy. The argument shows that Freudianism provides a mechanism by which the unconscious can be consciously and rationally addressed, suggesting that it is compatible with such rationalistic philosophy. This answer is therefore correct.

Key Takeaway:
When an Argument Completion question features a rebuttal structure, figure out whether the argument is leading to a conclusion that the opposing point falls short of proving its conclusion, or it is wrong. The argument will be building towards one of those conclusions most of the time.

Incorrect. Happiness is out of scope of the argument, and this answer is also too strong in stating that psychoanalysis can "always" result in it.

Incorrect. There's no discussion of any trends or of Freudianism taking hold in Western philosophy, so this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. Psychoanalysis may allow for you to overcome an impediment to a rational life plan, but that's not the same as providing such a plan itself.

Incorrect. No other psychological theory is discussed, so this answer comparing Freudianism to all other theories is both out of scope and too broad/strong.