Logical reasoning PrepTest 126 · Section 1 · Question 19

Incorrect. The statement in question is arguably a hypothesis (though it may be stretching that word a bit). However, while the author does pivot after bringing it up ("But"), she doesn't attempt to refute it. In fact, she establishes it as a true statement, just one that has to be understood in a particular manner.

Incorrect. The argument doesn't raise an objection to that generalization, just a particular way of understanding it. An objection to the statement would have to argue that painters aren't simply superior to others, and an example would likely have to compare two painters to show that, not discuss a single painter.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Argument Structure

Stimulus Summary:
Background Generalization - Despite different standards across time/culture, some artists are just better than others at getting their vision on the canvas.
Example - JRT is an extraordinary artist, but his paintings aren't literal representations of his subject
Conclusion - Who's a better artist has to consider the artist's purposes

Answer Anticipation:
The argument starts with a claim that everyone ("Even those who. . . .") must admit to be true, so it's a generalization that the author agrees with. However, then she pivots and qualifies that generalization to a certain extent—the superiority it mentions ("this superiority") has to take something specific into consideration. From that, it goes into an example highlighting why that consideration is important to the determination.

The statement in question is that background generalization—the one that everyone has to agree with, but according to the conclusion needs to take something specific (the artist's purposes) into consideration.

Answer Explanation:
The author agrees with this opening claim ("Even those. . . . must admit"), but she believes that "this superiority" has to be understood to include the artist's purposes. This answer correctly describes the role of the statement in question in the argument, so this is the right answer.

Key Takeaway:
Not all pivots are away from one argument and to another—usually the author's. Some arguments pivot from a related point, or from a seemingly contradictory point, or from a viewpoint that the author puts a limitation or qualification on. This is an example of the third.

Incorrect. This answer describes an intermediate conclusion (a claim derived from another claim is the part that describes a conclusion). The opening statement doesn't have any support, however, so it's not an intermediate conclusion. It also doesn't really support the conclusion—it more serves as the backdrop against which the conclusion makes a point.

Incorrect. It is a generalization, but the specific example cited isn't used to justify its relevance. The example is used to justify understanding the generalization in a specific light. In order for the comparative generalization in question to be related to an example ("superior" being an inherently comparative word), that example would need to be comparative.