Logical reasoning PrepTest 121 · Section 4 · Question 5

Incorrect. There's no indication that the death was avoidable—it's possible that once the fracture happened, he was a goner.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Argument Structure

Stimulus Summary:
Phenomenon - Mozart's death
Explanation - A fracture in his skull
Support - An accident caused a fracture which tore some veins causing blood to leak into his brain, which dried and caused faculties to be damaged commonly leading to death
More support - The fracture had started to heal when he died

Answer Anticipation:
This argument is set up to provide an explanation for a certain phenomenon (Mozart's death). That explanation involves quite a long causal chain supporting it, as well as some medical information—the fracture that set off the whole causal chain resulting in death shows some signs of healing, which lines up with the note that these fractures don't immediately lead to death.

Since the information about the partial healing is the statement in question in this Argument Structure question, we should look for an answer stating that it's a premise in support of the conclusion. The answer might get more specific than that, but let's use that as a guide to know which answers to consider more deeply.

Answer Explanation:
This answer describes a premise—a statement that "shows" something to be true is support, not a conclusion. And the partial healing does suggest that the fracture happened while Mozart was still alive, which would be necessary for the fracture to have caused the death. This answer describes the right role and reflects details of the argument correctly, so it's the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Argument Structure questions sometimes have very straightforward answers ("It's the main point of the argument"; "It's a premise supporting the main point"), but they sometimes have more involved answers. In general, be sure that you know at least the role of the statement (background/premise/intermediate conclusion/main point), and have some idea as to what a more involved answer might look like. For the latter, if you can tie it to a common method of reasoning or flawed reasoning, you'll probably be able to anticipate something approaching the correct answer.

Incorrect. While the partial healing does suggest that the blood may have had time to dry, it doesn't support that this dried blood had an impact on brain function.

Incorrect. The fracture partially healing suggests that Mozart didn't die immediately after the accident/fracture happened so, if anything, the statement in question supports the opposite of this answer.

Incorrect. The crack is noted as most likely being caused by an accident, but the partial healing doesn't provide support for any theory on how the crack occurred in the first place.